Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 22AHCV00437, Date: 2023-03-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22AHCV00437    Hearing Date: March 28, 2023    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - NORTHEAST DISTRICT

On July 5, 2022, plaintiff BFS Group, LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendant Vision Construction Group, Inc. (“Defendant”) arising from a breach of contract for the delivery of lumber.  On May 25, 2021, Defendant agreed to purchase lumber from non-party BMC West, LLC (“BMC”) for $801,324.37 but refused to perform under the contract after the price of lumber declined.  (Compl., ¶¶ 7-8.)  Instead, Defendant purchased lumber from another vendor, and declined to pay for or take delivery of the lumber it was obligated to purchase under its contract with BMC.  (Compl., ¶ 8.)  BMC sent a demand for performance but Defendant did not provide a formal response.  (Compl., ¶¶ 10-11.)  BMC assigned its rights under the contract with Defendant, including all accrued claims to Plaintiff, an affiliate, on January 1, 2022.  (Compl., ¶ 12.) 
          On March 15, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Form CIV-100 requesting a default judgment of $912,956.60, consisting of $801,324.37 as demanded in the complaint, $96,134.65 in interest, $3,158.58 in costs, and $12,339 in attorney fees.  Plaintiff acknowledges a credit of $195,294.18 resulting in a judgment with a balance of $717,662.42 because BMC was able to sell the lumber after Defendant breached the contract. 

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s filing and cannot enter a default judgment as requested at this time.   Plaintiff fails to cite to the precise clause in the contract which provides for attorneys’ fees.  (LASC Local Rule 3.207, subd. (b).)  And, even if it did, per Local Rule 3.214, Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees must be (but are not) calculated based on the schedule provided in Local Rule 3.214(a).  According to the Court’s calculation, based on the judgment provided on Form JUD-100, Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees should not exceed $9,066.62. If Plaintiff believes that a greater award of attorneys’ fees is warranted, Plaintiff is ordered to submit a supplemental declaration and itemized statement of the services rendered.  The Court also questions the accuracy of Plaintiff’s computation of interest because it does not consider how the principal owed would be reduced once Plaintiff was able to sell the lumber to other buyers.  (See Cohn Decl., ¶ 4.) 

In light of the foregoing, Plaintiff’s application for default is DENIED without prejudice.  The OSC is continued to ______________. 

Moving party to give notice.

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.

Dated this 28th day of March, 2023