Judge: Teresa A. Beaudet, Case: BC687258, Date: 2022-08-23 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: BC687258 Hearing Date: August 23, 2022 Dept: 50
|
RAVEN
STARRE, Plaintiff, vs. brooke
march, et al., Defendants. |
Case No.: |
BC687258 |
|
Hearing Date: |
August 23, 2022 |
|
|
Hearing Time: |
10:00 a.m. |
|
|
[TENTATIVE] ORDER
RE: PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT |
||
Plaintiff Raven Starre (“Plaintiff”) requests
entry of default judgment against Defendants Peter Kirkpatrick, Mindy Weather,
and Jason Starr. Plaintiff seeks judgment in the total amount of $23,000,000.00, comprising $23,000,000.00 demanded in the complaint.
The Court
notes a number of defects with the submitted default judgment package.
First, Plaintiff’s Request for Court Judgment
(Form CIV-100) indicates that Plaintiff requests judgment on the complaint
filed on “12/12/2017.”[1] However,
the operative complaint in this action is the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”),
which was filed on March 1, 2019.
Second, Plaintiff’s Request for Court
Judgment indicates that Plaintiff seeks a court judgment against “Mindy Weather.” (See Form CIV-100, Item 1(d).) However, “Mindy
Weathers” is named as a defendant in the SAC. Plaintiff’s proposed Judgment
(Form JUD-100) also lists the name “Mindy
Weathers.”
Third, Item 1(e)(1) of the proposed
Judgment should not be checked.
Fourth, Item 6(b)(2) of the Request for Court
Judgment does not specify the names and addresses shown on the envelopes mailed
to defendants.
Fifth, Plaintiff filed a “Declaration of Travis R. Eagan in Support of Judgment
Against Defaulted Defendants (1) Mindy Weathers, (2) Jason Starr, and (3) Peter
Kirkpatrick.” This declaration references a number of exhibits, but those
exhibits were not attached.
Sixth, Plaintiff filed a “Declaration of
Plaintiff Raven Starre in Support of Default Judgment Against Defaulted
Defendants (1) Mindy Weathers, (2) Jason Starr; and (3) Peter Kirkpatrick.”
However, the declaration is not signed. The Court notes that Code of
Civil Procedure section¿2015.5¿defines a¿“declaration”¿as a
writing that is signed, dated, and certified as true under penalty of perjury.¿
Accordingly, 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: August 23, 2022 ________________________________
Hon. Teresa A.
Beaudet
Judge, Los
Angeles Superior Court