Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 22STCV35554, Date: 2023-10-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV35554    Hearing Date: October 4, 2023    Dept: 53

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles – Central District

Department 53

MOVING PARTIES:             Plaintiffs Dennis Robert Platt and Vicki Sue Platt

RESPONDING PARTY:       n/a

Plaintiffs’ Request for Entry of Court Judgment by Default

Plaintiffs Dennis Robert Platt (“D. Platt”) and Vicki Sue Platt (“V. Platt”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) request that the court enter, separately, judgment by default against defendant Michael Scott Cox Jr., a/k/a Michael Scott Shepp (“Defendant”) and in favor of Plaintiffs.

Plaintiff D. Platt requests that the court enter judgment by default against Defendant in the total amount of $337,647,029, consisting of (1) $275,000,000 for pain, suffering, and inconvenience; (2) $50,000,000 for emotional distress; (3) $8,700,748 for medical expenses to date; (4) $2,937,322 for future medical expenses, present value; (5) $288,274 for loss of earnings to date; and (6) $720,685 for loss of earnings capacity, present value.  (JUD-100; Brief ISO Judgment, p. 8, ¶ 2.)

Plaintiff V. Platt requests that the court enter judgment by default against Defendant in the total amount of $50,000,000 for loss of consortium.

The court notes several defects with plaintiff D. Platt’s default judgment papers and therefore denies his request for default judgment.

First, the court notes that plaintiff D. Platt’s Request for Court Judgment, made on Judicial Council form CIV-100, requests $355,000,000 in damages, but the proposed judgment, made on Judicial Council form JUD-100, states that default shall be entered in the amount of $337,647,029.  Plaintiff D. Platt must correct this inconsistency.

Second, the court finds that plaintiff D. Platt has not presented to the court sufficient evidence supporting his claim for damages in the amount of $8,700,748 for medical expenses to date.[1]

Although D. Platt has presented evidence establishing the surgeries and other procedures that he underwent in 2021 and his medications, D. Platt has not presented sufficient evidence establishing the amount of medical expenses incurred to date.  (Riccardi Decl., ¶ 8.)  The court notes that Sheryl Riccardi, a registered nurse, has summarily stated, in her declaration and within the Life Care Plan attached to her declaration, that D. Platt has incurred $8,700,748.22 in medical damages between 2021 through 2023.  (Riccardi Decl., ¶ 13.)  This is not sufficient.  The court finds that D. Platt has not submitted sufficient evidence to support his request for past medical expenses.  D. Platt has not, for example, submitted a chart detailing the medical expenses incurred to date, copies of medical bills, or other such evidence.

Third, the court finds that plaintiff D. Platt has not presented to the court sufficient evidence supporting his claim for damages in the amount of $288,274 for loss earnings to date.  Instead, D. Platt has submitted only the Life Care Plan, in which it states that he has lost wages in the amount of $288,274.  (Riccardi Decl., Ex. 2, Life Care Plan, PDF p. 34 [Damages Summary].)  This is similarly insufficient.  The court has not been presented with evidence showing D. Platt’s lost wages or earnings and how D. Platt calculated this amount.  The court notes that (1) the Life of Care Plan explains that Dennis was a self-employed general contractor who worked 60-70 hours per week, and (2) D. Platt states, in his declaration, that he ran his own general contractor business named Dennis R. Platt, General Contractor, which he ran at the time that he was injured.  (Riccardi Decl., Ex. 2, Life of Care Plan, PDF p. 13, § Vocational Profile; D. Platt Decl., ¶ 6.)  However, neither the Life Care Plan nor the declaration sets forth the wages or earnings he previously received, the wages or earnings he expected to receive, and the calculations used to determine his lost wages or earnings to date.

Fourth, the court finds that D. Platt has not presented to the court sufficient evidence supporting his claim for damages in the amount of $720,685 for loss of earnings capacity.  As set forth above, D. Platt has not submitted evidence of his wages or earnings, the amount of earnings he expected to make, and the calculations supporting that amount.

The court therefore denies, without prejudice, plaintiff D. Platt’s request for court judgment by default.

The court exercises its discretion to continue the Order to Show Cause re entry of default judgment as to Plaintiffs’ requests for court judgment by default.

The court orders that the Order to Show Cause re entry of default judgment is continued to November 3, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 53.

The court orders plaintiff Dennis Robert Platt to e-file a new set of default judgment documents required by California Rules of Court, rule 3.1800 (including a proposed Default Judgment on Judicial Council Form JUD-100) no later than October 27, 2023.

Plaintiff V. Platt does not need to e-file a new set of default judgment documents required by California Rules of Court, rule 3.1800. 

The court directs the clerk to give notice of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:  October 4, 2023

_____________________________

Robert B. Broadbelt III

Judge of the Superior Court