Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 22AHCV00365, Date: 2023-05-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22AHCV00365    Hearing Date: May 3, 2023    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – NORTHEAST DISTRICT

I.            INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs Heng Leong Lim (“Lim”) and Jadene Ung (“Ung”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against defendant David Brownlow (“Defendant”) for breach of contract.  Plaintiffs allege that they loaned Defendant $150,000 and that Defendant has failed to pay them back.  Default was initially entered against Defendant on September 30, 2022 and Plaintiffs submitted a default package on October 11, 2022.  However, default was vacated on October 28, 2022 due to faulty service.  Plaintiffs filed another proof of service of summons and default was entered against Defendant on December 7, 2022. 

On December 22, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a default package that included a statement of the case, Request for Court Judgment on Form CIV-100, a request to dismiss Does 1-10, and declarations from Lim and Plaintiffs’ attorney, Timothy R. Casey.  A proposed judgment on Form JUD-100 was filed on December 22, 2022 but marked as rejected on December 28, 2022. 

On March 3, 2023, the Court continued the hearing on the default prove-up hearing to May 3, 2023.  Plaintiff submitted another default package on April 12, 2023. 

II.          DISCUSSION

Lim declares that he and his wife, Ung, entered into an agreement with Defendant on January 9, 2019 and agreed to lend Defendant $150,000.  (Lim Decl., 1:23-26.) Defendant was supposed to begin repayments on February 9, 2019; however, he has failed to make any payments and the entire balance plus interest remains due.  (Lim Decl., 1:26-27.)  Lim attaches a true and correct copy of the promissory note as Exhibit A to his declaration. 

At this time, Plaintiffs request a judgment of $211,782.30, consisting of $150,000 for the promissory note, $61,164.30 in interest, and $618 in costs.  Plaintiffs have withdrawn their claim for attorney fees. 

The Court cannot enter Plaintiffs’ request for court judgment for the following reasons:

1)   Plaintiffs calculate their prejudgment interest at a rate of 10% but the contract only provides for interest at the rate of 7%. 

2)   No revised proposed judgment has been filed and as previously noted, the most recent proposed judgment filed on February 27, 2023, does not indicate how much of the judgment each plaintiff will receive.   

III.        CONCLUSION

In light of the foregoing, the default prove-up hearing is CONTINUED to August 3, 2023 at 8:30 a.m.  All supporting paperwork must be filed no later than 2 weeks before the hearing date.

Dated this 3rd day of May, 2023

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at ALHDEPT3@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.