Judge: Rupert A. Byrdsong, Case: 24STCV14853, Date: 2025-06-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV14853    Hearing Date: June 13, 2025    Dept: 28

Tentative Ruling

Judge Rupert A. Byrdsong

Department 28

Hearing Date:                                  June 13, 2025

Case Name:                                      Prats, Inc. v. Mas Chingon Properties, LLC

Case No.:                                           24STCV14853

Motion:                                              Default Judgment

Moving Party:                                 Plaintiff Prats, Inc.

Responding Party:                         Unopposed

Notice:                                                OK

Recommended Ruling:               Plaintiff Prats Inc.’s request for entry of                                                                                                                    default judgment in its favor and against Defendant Mas                                                                               Chingon Properties, LLC is DENIED.

BACKGROUND

On June 13, 2024, Plaintiff Prats, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Mas Chingon Properties, LLC (“Defendant”) and Does 1 through 10. Plaintiff alleged causes of action for (1) breach of contract and (2) common counts.

Plaintiff alleges that the parties entered into an agreement whereby Plaintiff would perform improvements to Defendant’s property located at 8218 Firestone Boulevard, Downey, California 90241. Plaintiff claims it performed all its obligations under the contract, and Plaintiff tendered its final bill for all the work completed to Defendant. Allegedly, Defendant has failed to pay the bill and refuses to do so.

Plaintiff personally served Defendant on September 26, 2024. The Clerk entered Defendant’s default on November 21, 2024. This is Plaintiff’s second request for entry of default judgment.

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 has submitted a CIV-100 form seeking entry of judgment and a proposed form of judgment. Plaintiff dismissed the Doe defendants from this case on March 25, 2025. The issue with Plaintiff’s default packet pertains to Item 2 on the CIV-100 form. On Item 2, Plaintiff has not identified what costs and attorney fees it seeks. Yet, in Item 7, Plaintiff seeks $725.00 in costs and $9,750.00 in attorney fees. These items must be calculated into the judgment total in Item 2. Likewise, Plaintiff offers no proof supporting its attorney’s work on this case. Plaintiff does not attach a declaration from counsel identifying counsel’s hourly rate or the hours expended working on this litigation. The Court cannot grant attorney fees without some kind of proof or basis to judge the reasonableness of the request. Nor can the Court grant attorney fees without an identifiable statutory or contractual basis for doing so. Plaintiff is to resubmit the default packet with an updated CIV-100 form and some sort of proof to support the demand for attorney fees. Likewise, the judgment total in the proposed form of judgment should match the judgment total in Item 2 of the CIV-100 form.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, Plaintiff Prats, Inc.’s request for entry of default judgment in its favor and against Defendant Mas Chingon Properties, LLC is DENIED.