Judge: Wesley L. Hsu, Case: 20PSCV00659, Date: 2023-04-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20PSCV00659    Hearing Date: April 11, 2023    Dept: L

Plaintiff Sylvia Ramos’ Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice.

Background    

Plaintiff Sylvia Ramos (“Plaintiff”) alleges as follows: Plaintiff worked as an enrollment specialist for Defendant Calix Drugs Pharmacy, Inc. (“Defendant”) from August 8, 2018-December 17, 2018. Plaintiff was terminated after she complained about unpaid wages.

On October 7, 2020, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Defendant and Does 1-50 for:

1.     Discrimination on the Basis of Participation in Protected Conduct in Violation of Gov. Code § 12940 et seq.

2.     Failure to Prevent Discrimination in Violation of California Government Code § 12940(k)

3.     Retaliation in Violation of Gov. Code § 12940(h)

4.     Wrongful Termination

5.     Failure To Pay Minimum Wages And Overtime In Violation of Cal. Labor Code § 204 et seq.

6.     Violation of Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq.

On June 14, 2022, counsel for Defendant’s motion to be relieved as counsel was granted; at that time, the court set an Order to Show Cause Re: Representation of Corporation for August 17, 2022.

On August 17, 2022, the court set an Order to Show Cause Re: Why the Answer Should Not Be Stricken for October 4, 2022. On October 4, 2022, the court ordered Defendant’s answer stricken.

On October 6, 2022, Defendant’s default was entered.

An Order to Show Cause Re: Default Judgment is set for April 4, 2023.

Discussion

Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is denied without prejudice. The following defects are noted:

1.     Plaintiff has failed to dismiss Does 1-50.

2.     Plaintiff has failed to file a summary of the case, as per California Rules of Court

(“CRC”) Rule 3.1800, subdivision (a)(1).

3.     Plaintiff seeks $300,000.00 in damages, which is comprised as follows: $99,200.00 in

back pay, plus $33,280.00 in front pay, plus $96 in unpaid wages, plus $3,840.00 in waiting time penalties, plus $163,584.00 in non-economic, emotional distress damages. Plaintiff, however, has failed to support her declaration with any documentary evidence, including the communications made between Plaintiff and her supervisor, Paul Pino, and referenced in Paragraphs 5-8. Plaintiff has not provided the court with a copy of her pay stub and any other employment records which would reflect that she was “shorted” payment for six hours of work during a pay period ending on or around December 11, 2018 and that, at the time of her termination, she was employed full-time at an hourly rate of $16.00.

4.     Plaintiff must provide authority for her $46,426.71 prejudgment interest request.

5.     Plaintiff seeks nearly three years of back pay and one year of front pay; however,

Plaintiff appears to have been employed from at least February 2019-March 2020. (See Plaintiff’s Decl., ¶ 14.) Plaintiff further concedes that since March 2020, she has had several jobs. Plaintiff has failed to provide the court with any informative relative to her earnings during the February 2019-present time period.