Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 23AHCV02879, Date: 2025-01-31 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23AHCV02879    Hearing Date: January 31, 2025    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - NORTHEAST DISTRICT

 

STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANIES,

                    Plaintiff(s),

          vs.

 

JM DRYWALL PRO INC.,

 

                    Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

     CASE NO.:  23AHCV02879

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

 

Dept. 3

8:30 a.m.

January 31, 2025

 

)

 

 

Plaintiff State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Companies (“Plaintiff”) seeks a default judgment against defendant JM Drywall Pro Inc. (“Defendant”) for $45,965.14, consisting of $36,843.02 in unpaid premiums for a worker’s compensation insurance policy, $8,354.52 in prejudgment interest, and $767 in costs.

Plaintiff’s evidence does not sufficiently explain the amounts purportedly owed. Plaintiff’s representative, Paul Ortiz, declares that he is the Underwriting Section Manager and authenticates a Final Premium Audit Billing statement dated January 31, 2022, for $7,942 in additional premiums following a policy audit for the policy term September 9, 2020, to September 9, 2021. (Oritz Decl., Ex. B [pp. 52-53 of PDF].)

Another Final Premium Audit Billing statement prepared October 18, 2022, reflects that $28,901.02 was owed for the policy term of September 9, 2021, to April 1, 2022. This amount includes a $19,240 “audit noncompliance charge.” (Ex. B [pp. 56-57 of PDF].) The insurance policy provides that an audit noncompliance charge may be applied if the insured fails to allow the examination and audit of its records. The method of calculating this charge is established in a schedule. (Ortiz Decl., Ex. A [p. 38 of PDF].) The schedule states “$2,122.00” in the column labeled “Basis of Audit noncompliance Charge” and “0.000” for “Maximum Audit Noncompliance Charge Multiplier.” (Ibid.) Based on the language of this policy, it is unclear how the charge of $19,240 was reached and where Defendant agreed to be liable for that amount.

Additionally, even if the charge were appropriate, the evidence submitted does not support a judgment of $36,843.02 because the October 18, 2022 premium due states that $28,901.02 is owed. Overall, it is unclear how the documents submitted support the judgment requested.

The hearing on the default prove-up is CONTINUED to _____________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 3 of the Alhambra Courthouse so that Plaintiff may submit additional explanatory briefing and, if necessary, evidence supporting its application for default judgment. Any revised or additional papers must be filed no later than 5 court days before the date of the hearing.

Dated this 31st day of January 2025

 

 

 

 

       William A. Crowfoot

Judge of the Superior Court

 

 

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.