Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 23PSCV02035, Date: 2024-07-29 Tentative Ruling

The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, counsel are advised to check this website periodically to determine whether any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling. Counsel may submit on a tentative ruling by calling the clerk in Department G at (909) 802-1104 prior to 8:30 a.m. the morning of the hearing.

Case Number: 23PSCV02035    Hearing Date: July 29, 2024    Dept: G

Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s Application for Default Judgment

Respondent: NO OPPOSITION

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s Application for Default Judgment is CONTINUED to a date to be determined in Department G (Pomona). Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is also ordered to file an updated proof of service that reflects proper service on Defendant Ameer M. Erfan.

BACKGROUND

This is a collections action arising from a credit card agreement. Defendant Ameer M. Erfan opened a credit card account with Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Wells Fargo). Subsequently within the last four years, Erfan allegedly had an unpaid balance of $30,080.84 and breached the credit card agreement.

On July 7, 2023, Wells Fargo filed a complaint against Erfan, alleging the following causes of action: (1) breach of agreement, (2) account stated, (3) open book, (4) money lent, and (5) indebtedness.

On April 15, 2024, the Court entered default against Erfan. On June 26, 2024, Wells Fargo submitted the present application for default judgment.

An OSC Re: Default Judgment is set for July 29, 2024.

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

Wells Fargo seeks default judgment against Erfan in the total amount of $30,585,84, including $30,075.84 in damages and $510.00 in costs. However, the Court notes Wells Fargo’s proof of service of summons and the complaint on Erfan is defective. While the proof of service filed October 23, 2023, states Wells Fargo’s process server served “Ameer M Efran” with substitute service in Diamond Bar, the court notes that the defendant’s actual name is “Ameer M. Erfan” as alleged in the Complaint and stated in the summons. The Court also notes Wells Fargo seeks default judgment against Erfan, not Efran.

Because it is unclear if Wells Fargo served the correct defendant, the court will grant a continuance for Wells Fargo to provide an updated proof of service that establishes service was properly effected on the defendant in this action.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, Wells Fargo’s application for default judgment is CONTINUED to a date to be determined in Department G (Pomona). Wells Fargo is also ordered to file an updated proof of service that reflects proper service on Erfan.