Judge: Peter A. Hernandez, Case: 24PSCV00056, Date: 2024-05-23 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24PSCV00056    Hearing Date: May 23, 2024    Dept: K

Plaintiff Oaktree Business Park, LLC’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice.

Background   

Plaintiff Oaktree Business Park, LLC (“Plaintiff”) alleges as follows:

Plaintiff owns the real property located at 437 South Cataract Avenue, Suite #3 in San Dimas (“subject property”). On February 22, 2011, Plaintiff, as landlord, and Sanjesh Sharma (‘Sharma”), as tenant, entered into a three-year lease agreement for the subject property (“Lease”). The parties subsequently executed four Amendments to the Lease; Amendment No. 3 added New Ventures, Inc. (“NVI”) as a tenant. Amendment No. 4 extended the Lease term through and including December 31, 2025 and increased the base monthly rent was increased to $3,683.00 for the January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023 time frame and to $3,867.00 for the January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024 time frame. Sharma and NVI vacated the subject property on October 21, 2023.

On January 5, 2024, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Sharma, NVI and Doe 1 through Doe 50 for:

1.                  Breach of Lease & Damages Pursuant to Civil Code § 1951.2 et seq.

2.                  Common Counts

On March 11, 2024, Sharma and NVI’s defaults were entered.

A Case Management Conference is set for May 23, 2024.

Discussion

Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is denied without prejudice. The following defects are noted:

1.                  Plaintiff has failed to provide the court with a brief summary of the case, as per

California Rules of Court (“CRC”), rule 3.1800, subdivision (a)(1).

2.                  Plaintiff’s Request for Court Judgment (Judicial Council Form CIV-100) identifies the following as “judgment to be entered” (i.e., Paragraph 2): $39,932.88 as the “[d]emand of complaint,” plus $7,733.50 in general damages, $1,039.235 in interest, $555.00 in costs and $1,819.99 in attorney’s fees. The $7,733.50 in general damages is comprised of $1,933.50 in unpaid rent for the February 1-15, 2024 time frame, plus $5,800.00 for repairs to the premises. (See Griffin Wright Decl., ¶ 4). Plaintiff does not appear to request damages for repair in its complaint, however.

3.                  It does not appear that Plaintiff has addressed the disposition of the $5,854.05 security deposit identified in Paragraph 51 of the lease.

4.                  Plaintiff has failed to specify the “other” in Paragraph 6(a)(5) of the proposed judgment.