Judge: Teresa A. Beaudet, Case: 24STCV09809, Date: 2025-03-11 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCV09809 Hearing Date: March 11, 2025 Dept: 50
| 
   JIMMY MORLET,                         Plaintiff,             vs. HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.,                         Defendants.  | 
  
   Case No.:  | 
  
   24STCV09809    | 
 
| 
   Hearing Date:  | 
  March 11, 2025  | 
 |
| 
   Hearing Time:  | 
  
   10:00 a.m.   | 
 |
| 
   [TENTATIVE] ORDER
  RE:   PLAINTIFF’S
  REQUEST FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT  | 
 ||
            
Plaintiff
Jimmy Morlet (“Plaintiff”) requests entry of default judgment against Defendants
Romo Auto Sales, LLC, Hudson Insurance Company, and Does 1 through 50 in the
total amount of $90,000. 
The Court notes a number of defects with the submitted
default judgment package. 
First,
Plaintiff seeks entry of default judgment against Hudson Insurance Company, yet
Hudson was ordered dismissed without prejudice on October 28, 2024 pursuant to
an oral request made by Plaintiff. Default judgment cannot be entered against a
dismissed party. 
Second,
there is a discrepancy between the amount of default judgment sought. On
Plaintiff’s Request for Entry of Judgement (CIV-100) Plaintiff entered $90,000
as the total amount sought, which includes $50,000 demanded in the Complaint,
but Plaintiff does not explain where the other $40,000 is derived from. On
Plaintiff’s Default Judgment form (JUD-100) Plaintiff seeks default judgment in
the amount of $50,000.
Third,
Plaintiff improperly seeks to obtain judgment against Does 1 through 50 but has
not served the Does. As such, Plaintiff cannot obtain judgment against them. 
Fourth,
as Plaintiff cannot obtain judgment against Does 1 through 50, Plaintiff has
failed to file a request for dismissal as to the Doe Defendants. A party
seeking a default judgment must file “[a] dismissal of all parties against whom
judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment against
specified parties under Code of Civil Procedure section 579, supported by a
showing of grounds for each judgment…” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1800, subd.
(a)(7).)  
Based on the foregoing, the Court denies
Plaintiff’s request for default judgment without prejudice. The Court will
discuss with Plaintiff a schedule for resubmission of the default judgment
package.
DATED:  March 11, 2025                                     ________________________________
Hon.
Teresa A. Beaudet
Judge,
Los Angeles Superior Court