Judge: Thomas Falls, Case: 20PSCV00747, Date: 2022-08-02 Tentative Ruling
The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, attorneys are advised to check this website to determine if any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling. Counsel may submit on the tentative rulings by calling the clerk in Dept. R at 909-802-1117 before 8:30 the morning of the hearing.
Case Number: 20PSCV00747 Hearing Date: August 2, 2022 Dept: R
Caine & Weiner Company, Inc. v. Magic
Group Int’l (20PSCV00747)
______________________________________________________________________________
Plaintiff Caine & Weiner Company’s APPLICATION FOR
DEFAULT JUDGMENT
Tentative Ruling
Plaintiff Caine & Weiner Company’s APPLICATION FOR
DEFAULT JUDGMENT is GRANTED, contingent upon submission of a
supplemental declaration authenticating Defendant’s account.
Background
On November 4, 2020, Plaintiff Caine & Weiner Company,
Inc. (“Plaintiff”) filed suit against Magic Group International, Inc.; Dada
Ojeisekhoba; and Does 1 through 10 for breach of contract, open book account,
account stated, and quantum valebant on the grounds that Defendants breached a
written agreement by failing to pay for delivered goods.
On March 12, 2021, default was entered as to Defendant Magic
Group International, Inc.
On March 9, 2022, Plaintiff dismissed the complaint against
Dada Ojeisekhoba.
On July 15, 2022, default was entered against Defendant
Magic Group Int’l. That same day, Doe Defendants were dismissed, as well as the
fourth cause of action for quantum valebant.
Legal Standard
Code of
Civil Procedure section 585 permits entry of a judgment after a Defendant has
failed to timely answer after being properly served. 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;
(7) 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; (8) exhibits as necessary; and (9) a request for attorneys’
fees if allowed by statute or by the agreement of the parties. (Cal.
Rules of Court, Rule 3.1800.)
Discussion
Plaintiff seeks default judgment against Defendant Magic
Group International in the total amount of $62,037.21. The break-down is as
follow:
Damages: $39,101.92,
Prejudgment Interest at the annual rate of 10%: $20,772.23,[1]
Attorney Fees: $1,463.06,[2]
and
Costs: $600.00
The only defect noted is that Plaintiff has not submitted
the declaration of a custodian of records who can authenticate the contract.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, the GRANTS Plaintiff’s application, contingent
upon submission of a supplemental declaration authenticating Defendant’s
account.
[1] Prejudgment interest commences on the date of the
breach. Defendant breached the agreement on March 17, 2017. Thus, the following
calculation applies: $39,101.92 (damages as stated in the complaint) times 10%
per year divided by 365 days/year times 1939 days from March 17, 2017 to date
of filing the application equals $20,772.23.
[2] Indeed, the contract allows for the recovery of
attorney/legal fees “if collection proceedings or litigation is required.”
(Complaint, Ex. A.) Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled the requested attorney
fees as it follows the Local Rules.