Judge: Upinder S. Kalra, Case: 22STCV18930, Date: 2023-08-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV18930    Hearing Date: August 21, 2023    Dept: 51

Tentative Ruling

Judge Upinder S. Kalra, Department 51

HEARING DATE:   August 21, 2023                                             

CASE NAME:           DHL Express (USA), Inc. v. Milk Bear Gallery Inc.

CASE NO.:                22STCV18930

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff DHL Express (USA), Inc.

RESPONDING PARTY(S): None as of August 16, 2023.

REQUESTED RELIEF:

1.      An order granting default judgment against Defendant.

TENTATIVE RULING:

1.      Default Judgment is GRANTED.

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

On June 9, 2022, Plaintiff DHL Express (USA) Inc., (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendant Milk Bear Gallery Inc., (“Defendant.”) The complaint alleged two causes of action: (1) Breach of Contract and (2) Common Counts. The complaint alleges that the two parties entered a contract whereby Plaintiff would provide shipping to Defendant and later invoice Defendant. However, Plaintiff has performed the shipping for Defendant, but Defendant has failed to pay various invoices, totaling $104,288.96.

On November 5, 2022, Plaintiff filed an Order for Service Upon the Secretary of State, which was GRANTED.

On December 21, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Request for Entry of Default, which was GRANTED.

On July 20, 2023, Plaintiff filed Default Judgment Documents.

LEGAL STANDARD:

CCP § 585 permits entry of a judgment after a Defendant fails to timely answer following proper service of process. A party seeking judgment on the default by the Court must file a Request for Court Judgment, and provide: (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. (CRC Rule 3.1800.)

Discussion

Proof of Service of Process: The Proof of Service of Process was filed on 7/20/2023, which indicates the documents were served via mail.

Request for Entry of Default: CIV-100 was filed on 7/20/2023. Default previously GRANTED, on 12/21/2022.

Prove Up: Plaintiff seeks entry of judgment against Defendant in the amounts shown below:

(1)        Demand of Complaint:           $ 104,288.96

(2)        Interest:                                   $ 18,245.57

(3)        Costs:                                      $ 2,381.06

(4)        Attorneys’ Fees:                      $ 0.00

Total:                                                  $ 124,915.59

In support, Plaintiff has provided the following documents:

·         A brief summary of the case: The Declaration of Donald Patton, the Senior Credit and Debt Recovery Supervisor for Plaintiff provides a brief description of the case.

·         Declarations or other admissible evidence in support of the judgment requested: The Declaration of Donald Patton and Philip McDermott are provided.

·         Interest computations as necessary: Exhibit 5 of the Philip McDermott Declaration provides the interest computation. This is based on a 10% rate per annum.

·         Memorandum of costs and disbursements: The Memorandum of Costs was filed on 7/20/2023. It requests a total of $2,381.06. This is based on $435 for filing and motion fees, $244.00 for service of process, $137 for electronic filling or service fees, and $1,564.56 is for unsuccessful service attempts (Ex. 9 of McDermott declaration.)

·         Proposed form of judgment: Form JUD-100 was filed on 7/20/2023.

·         Dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought: Form CIV-110 was filed on 7/20/2023.

·         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: N/A

·         Exhibits as necessary: Both Declarations contain various Exhibits, which includes invoices, interest computations, and contract.

·         Request for attorneys’ fees if allowed by statute or by the agreement of the parties. (CRC Rule 3.1800.): N/A

Conclusion:

            For the foregoing reasons, the Court decides the pending motion as follows:

Default Judgment is GRANTED.

Moving party is to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:             August 21, 2023                      __________________________________                                                                                                                Upinder S. Kalra

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court