Case Number: KC069593 Hearing Date: March 28, 2018 Dept: O

Ung v. Tang (KC069593)

Plaintiff’s APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

Respondent: NO OPPOSITION

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff’s application for default judgment is DENIED without prejudice to allow Plaintiff to resubmit and present evidence on the issues noted below.

1. Plaintiff alleges that defendant is not a licensed contractor, but provides no documentary evidence in support of this assertion.

2. Plaintiff does not attest as to the scope of the work defendant allegedly completed. Plaintiff alleges that defendant completed approximately 15% of the remodeling project (Complaint, ¶¶ 15 and 17). The parties’ agreement does not set forth a completion date. Plaintiff does not explain why it cost him $122,838.48 in labor and materials to complete a remodeling project for which defendant had charged $82,500.00 and completed 15%. He does not confirm that the scope of the work performed on the subject property after defendant allegedly abandoned the remodeling project was the same and did not exceed the scope of the work defendant agreed to perform. He does not attest to the date when defendant ceased working on the subject property.

3. Plaintiff seeks lost rental income, but does not attest that the subject property was a rental property. He does not state whether or not the subject property was rented out at any time prior to the parties’ agreement or provide any information as to the subject property’s current rental status. Plaintiff does not provide the court with any information relative to the square footage and features of the subject property. The “comps,” moreover, merely consist of pictures of various homes in the Pasadena/South Pasadena/San Gabriel area which were purportedly for rent during an unspecified time; there is no information regarding the actual features and square footage of these properties provided to show they are in fact comparable.