Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 22PSCV00501, Date: 2023-02-23 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22PSCV00501    Hearing Date: February 23, 2023    Dept: G

Plaintiff Pasadena Federal Credit Union’s Application for Default Judgment

Respondent: NO OPPOSITION

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Pasadena Federal Credit Union’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice.

BACKGROUND

This is a collections action arising from a credit card agreement. On January 3, 2020, Defendant Ruben Bisuano, also known as Ruben A. Bisuano, applied for a VISA credit card with Plaintiff Pasadena Federal Credit Union. Plaintiff approved Defendant’s application and granted Defendant a credit limit of $2,000. Following Defendant’s last payment of January 18, 2022, Defendant has failed to make any subsequent payments and owes a balance of $28,474.20.

On May 24, 2022, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendant and Does 1-10, alleging the following causes of action: (1) breach of contract, (2) money lent, and (3) account stated. On November 15, Plaintiff’s registered process server substitute served Defendant in Culver City.

On February 8, 2023, default was entered against Defendant. On February 16, Plaintiff submitted the present application for default judgment.  

A case management conference and OSC Re: default/default judgment is set for February 23, 2023.

LEGAL STANDARD

Code of Civil Procedure section 585 permits entry of a default judgment after a party has filed to timely respond or appear.  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 or an application for separate judgment under CCP § 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment; (7) exhibits as necessary; and (8) a request for attorneys’ fees if allowed by statute or by the agreement of the parties.  (Cal. Rules of Court 3.1800.) 

ANALYSIS

Plaintiff seeks default judgment against Defendant in the total amount of $30,949.58, including $24,474.20 in damages, $4,643.10 in interest, $1,124.23 in attorney fees, and $708.05 in costs. For the following reasons, the court DENIES Plaintiff’s application without prejudice.

First, “Plaintiffs in a default judgment proceeding must prove they are entitled to the damages claimed.” (Kim v. Westmoore Partners, Inc. (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 267, 288, quoting Barragan v. Banco BCH (1986) 188 Cal.App.3d 283, 302.) Here, the court notes Plaintiff requests $24,474.20 while the complaint and declaration both claim a balance of $28,474.20. (Complaint, ¶ 12, 17, 19-20; Benson Decl., ¶ 12.) Furthermore, it unclear from Plaintiff’s evidence what the actual balance on the account was as Plaintiff does not provide any form of charge-off statement. While Plaintiff alleges Defendant made a last payment in January 2022 (Complaint, ¶ 11; Benson Decl., ¶ 11), Plaintiff only provides statements from January 2021 with a $311.48 balance and February 9, 2021 with a $739.06 balance. (Benson Decl., Ex. 3.) 

Second, while Plaintiff requests an interest rate of 17.99%, Plaintiff does not provide any justification for this rate as the credit card agreement lists an interest rate of 8.99% and the default prejudgment interest rate for contracts is 10%.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s application for default judgment is DENIED without prejudice.