Judge: Rupert A. Byrdsong, Case: 23STCV26772, Date: 2025-02-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV26772    Hearing Date: February 11, 2025    Dept: 28

Tentative Ruling

Judge Rupert A. Byrdsong

Department 28

Hearing Date:                                  February 11, 2025       

Case Name:                                      Calvary SPV I, LLC v. Kang

Case No.:                                           23STCV26772                                               

Motion:                                              Default Judgment

Moving Party:                                 Plaintiff Calvary SPV I, LLC

Responding Party:                         Unopposed

Notice:                                                OK

Recommended Ruling:               Plaintiff’s request for entry of default judgment in its favor

and against Defendant Bong C. Kang is GRANTED in the            amount of $25,753.65.

BACKGROUND

On November 1, 2023, Plaintiff Calvary SPV I, LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Bong C. Kang (“Defendant”) and Does 1 through 10. Plaintiff alleged causes of action for (1) account stated and (2) money lent, both of which are premised under the Fair Debt Buying Practices Act.

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant obtained a line of credit with Citibank, N.A. Plaintiff further claims that Defendant owes a balance of $25,093.32 on this line of credit, and Defendant has not paid this debt. Allegedly, Citibank, N.A. sold and assigned the right to the debt to Plaintiff. Plaintiff claims it made a demand for payment on Defendant, but Defendant has not paid.

Plaintiff personally served Defendant on November 12, 2023. The clerk entered Defendant’s default on April 8, 2024.

ANALYSIS

Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) Section 585 permits entry of a judgment after a defendant’s default has been entered.  A party seeking judgment on the default by the Court must file a Request for Court Judgment, and: (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 CCP 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.  CRC 3.1800.

JC Form CIV-100 must be used to request court judgment.  Item number 2 must be completed.  Item number 8 must be completed if the Defendant is an individual.  Plaintiff must submit a proposed form of judgment. 

Here, Plaintiff used JC Form CIV-105 for Defendant, completed items 2 and 9, and submitted a proposed form of judgment using a JUD-100 form. Plaintiff dismissed the Doe defendants from the case on November 12, 2024. Because this is an action brought under the Fair Debt Buying Practices Act, a CIV-105 form is the proper form, and the declaration of military service is item 9 on this form, not number 8 as in the case with the CIV-100.

By defaulting, a defendant is deemed to admit all material allegations of the complaint that are well pleaded.  Molen v. Friedman (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 1149, 1156.  The complaint need only alleged facts sufficient to apprise a defendant of the nature of the plaintiff’s demand, and it is immaterial that the complaint might have been subject to a demurrer for failure to make an allegation necessary to state a cause of action.  Id. at 1157.  See also CCP § 431.20; Bristol Convalescent Hospital v. Stone (1968) 258 Cal.App.2d 848, 859 (stating that defaulting defendant admits absolute verity of all allegations of complaint giving rise to liability).

The plaintiff must prove the amount of damages before an actual entry of default judgment.  See Ostling v. Loring (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 1731, 1745.  In determining whether the plaintiff is entitled to an award of damages after the defendant has defaulted, the plaintiff is only required to present evidence establishing a prima facie case for damages.  Johnson v. Stanhiser (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 357, 361-362.  The trial court must hear the evidence offered by the plaintiff and render judgment “‘in [its] favor for such sum, not exceeding the amount stated in the complaint, or for such relief, not exceeding that demanded in the complaint, as appears from the evidence to be just.  [Citations.]’”  Id. at 362.

A.           General Damages

The demand of the Complaint is $25,093.32. Defendant has a line of credit open with Citibank, N.A., and Defendant owed $25,093.32 as of July 6, 2020. Canela Decl., Exs. B, C. Citibank, N.A. sold and assigned its right to collect the debt to Plaintiff on August 19, 2020. Ex. A. Defendant has not paid the debt owed, and Plaintiff set a demand letter for payment. Zarco Decl., Ex. 1.

Thus, Plaintiff has sufficiently proven its causes of action for the amount of $25,093.32.

B.           Costs

Plaintiff requests recovery of costs in the amount of $660.33.  The memorandum of costs states that the request is based on (a) $435.00 in clerk’s filing fees, (b) $154.00 in process server’s fees, and (c) $71.33 in e-filing fees. CIV-100, ln. 10.

Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to costs in the amount of $891.54.

C.           Total Judgment

The Court finds that Plaintiff proved the following judgment amount against Defendant:

CONCLUSION

Therefore, Plaintiff's request for entry of default judgment in its favor and against Defendant Bong C. Kang is GRANTED in the amount of $25,753.96.