Judge: Michelle Williams Court, Case: 22STCV07998, Date: 2022-09-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV07998    Hearing Date: September 22, 2022    Dept: 74

22STCV07998           TUAN-HSI YEH vs HSIEN CHEN JUNG

OSC RE ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT

TENTATIVE RULING:  Today’s hearing is CONTINUED to October 21, 2022 for plaintiff to submit certified translations of the relevant documents, as previously ordered.

Background

On March 4, 2022, Plaintiffs Tuan-His Yeh and Gigi Jung Chi Lin filed this action against Defendant Hsien Chen Jung asserting causes of action for: (1) breach of written promissory note; (2) misrepresentation; (3) fraudulent inducement; (4) false promise; (5) money had and received; and (6) conversion.

On July 5, 2022, the Court issued an order denying Plaintiffs’ first request for entry of default judgment “as there are no certified translations and there is no Request for Dismissal of the Doe defendants.”

On August 16, 2022, Plaintiffs filed an amended case summary with attached exhibits.

On August 18, 2022, the Court issued an order continuing Plaintiffs’ second request for entry of default judgment noting Plaintiffs failed to provide proper translations and failed to request the dismissal of Does 1-50.

On August 22, 2022, Plaintiffs filed their third set of documents seeking entry of a default judgment.

Legal Standard

Code of Civil Procedure section 585 permits entry of a judgment after a Defendant fails to timely answer following proper service of process. A party seeking judgment on the default by the Court must file a Request for Court Judgment, and provide: (1) a brief summary of the case; (2) declarations or other admissible evidence in support of the judgment requested; (3) interest computations as necessary; (4) a memorandum of costs and disbursements; (5) a proposed form of judgment; (6) a dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought; (7) a dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment; (8) exhibits as necessary; and (9) a request for attorneys’ fees if allowed by statute or by the agreement of the parties. (Cal. R. Ct., rule 3.1800(a).)

Plaintiffs Must Submit Certified Translations

The Court has reviewed the supplemental documents filed by Plaintiffs on August 22, 2022 in support of their request for entry of default judgment. Plaintiffs have now dismissed Does 1-50 as required.

On August 18, 2022, the Court issued an order on Plaintiffs’ request for entry of default judgment stating:

There is no basis to conclude Plaintiffs’ translations were made by a certified translator as required. (See Cal. R. Ct., rule 3.1110(g) (“Exhibits written in a foreign language must be accompanied by an English translation, certified under oath by a qualified interpreter.”) Evid. Code §§ 750, 751, 753; Gov. Code §§ 68561(a); 68566.) Qian Wen does not state they are a court-certified translator, only that they are “competent to translate from Chinese to English,” which is not sufficient. Additionally, the translation is not made under oath. Plaintiffs must submit translations of the documents from a court-certified translator.  

(August 18, 2022 Order.)

On August 22, 2022, Plaintiffs filed the same “Amended Case Summary Pursuant to CRC 3.1800” as the one filed on August 16, 2022 and referenced in the Court’s August 18, 2022 order. Plaintiff did not file any additional translations.

Accordingly, the documents filed on August 22, 2022 suffer from the same defect and the Court’s August 18, 2022 order quoted above equally applies.

Plaintiffs must submit certified translations of the foreign-language documents from a court-certified translator. The translations by Qian Wen are not sufficient.