Judge: Teresa A. Beaudet, Case: 23STCV00429, Date: 2024-11-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV00429    Hearing Date: November 8, 2024    Dept: 50

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50

            Plaintiff Brandi Rothans (“Plaintiff”) requests entry of default judgment against Defendant July 5th LLC (“Defendant”). Plaintiff seeks judgment in the total amount of $27,762.26, comprising $21,720.00 in damages, $202.52 in interest, $2,555.59 in costs, and $3,284.15 in attorney’s fees.

            The Court notes several defects with the submitted default judgment package.¿

First, Plaintiff seeks $21,720.00 in damages. However, Plaintiff does not appear to provide evidence substantiating this amount of requested damages. Plaintiff asserts that she is owed $5,320 in unpaid minimum wages and overtime wages, and $5,760 in unpaid business expenses. (Rothans Decl., ¶¶ 13, 19.) These amounts add up to $11,080.00. Moreover, as discussed below, the Court finds that there are issues with the damages amounts requested. 

In her supporting declaration, Plaintiff asserts that she is “owed approximately $5,320 in unpaid minimum wages and overtime wages…This amount was calculated by adding the total amount of unpaid minimum wages that Defendant failed to pay me from the date of my termination (February 2022) up to the date I began my current employment (June 2022), which was a span of approximately four months…plus unpaid overtime wages that Defendant failed to pay me…” (Rothans Decl., ¶ 13.) However, Plaintiff does not appear to explain why she is purportedly entitled to minimum and overtime wages for a period in which she was not working for Defendant. Plaintiff does not appear to cite to any legal authority supporting this proposition.

Plaintiff also asserts that “Defendant Debt Resolution Centers owes me $5,760 in unpaid business expenses from June 2019 through February 2022 for business expenses which I incurred in the performance of my job duties.” (Rothans Decl., ¶ 19.) The Court notes that “Debt Resolution Centers” is not a defendant in this action, and Plaintiff seeks default judgment against July 5th LLC.

Second, Item 7 of the Request for Court Judgment (Form CIV-100) is blank.

Third, Plaintiff’s request for $3,284.15 in attorney’s fees exceeds the permissible amount under Los Angeles Superior Court Local ¿¿Rule 3.214¿¿. It appears that Plaintiff determined the requested amount based on calculations for a default case over $100,000. (See LASC Local Rules 3.214; Karsik Decl., ¶ 32.) However, Plaintiff seeks $21,720.00 in damages here.  

Fourth, Plaintiff’s proposed judgment (Form JUD-100) should check the box for “By Court” under “JUDGMENT.”

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s request for entry of default judgment is denied without prejudice. The Court will discuss with Plaintiff a schedule for resubmission of the default judgment package.

DATED:  November 8, 2024                   ________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court