Case Number: BC657535 Hearing Date: October 16, 2018 Dept: 20

Tentative Ruling

Judge Dalila C. Lyons

Department 20

Hearing Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 —-Continued to 10/23/18, 1:30 p.m.

Posted on lacourt.org: October 11, 2018

Case Name: Rawlings Mechanical Corp. v. Women’s Empowerment Partnership, Inc.

Case No.: BC657535

Motion: OSC re: Default Judgment

Ruling: Plaintiff Rawlings Mechanical Corp.’s request for entry of default judgment is continued to October 23, 2018, 1:30 p.m. to allow additional time for plaintiff to submit supplemental declaration supporting the request for attorneys’ fees. The supplemental declaration must be filed by October 18, 2018 and a courtesy copy must be lodged in Department 20. Failure to file said declaration will result in the Court awarding $1,849.52 as attorneys’ fees per LASC Local Rule 3.214.

BACKGROUND

On April 11, 2017, Plaintiff Rawlings Mechanical Corp. (“Plaintiff” or “Rawlings Mechanical”) filed the Complaint against Defendant Women’s Empowerment Partnership, Inc. (“Defendant” or “WEP”) and Does 1 through 50 for (1) breach of contract; (2) common count – open book account; (3) common count – money had and received; and (4) common count – quantum meruit.

Prior to July 14, 2016, WEP and The Aerospace Corporation entered into a contract to undertake the work for improvements entitled “Courtyard Bunker Construction” and “AC Courtyard Bunker” (collectively the “Projects”). After July 14, 2016, Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with Defendant to provide goods and services for the contract. Under the terms of the agreement, Plaintiff would send Defendant invoices for the work Plaintiff performed on the Projects on a monthly basis and Defendant was to pay such invoices upon receipt, but in no event no later than seven days after Defendant received payment from The Aerospace Corporation for the work performed. But Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff for the work Plaintiff performed and there remains an outstanding balance in the amount of $48,650.53, plus prejudgment interest and pursuant to the subcontract a charge on the progress payments of 2% per month from the date the payment should have been made pursuant to Business & Professions Code § 7108.5 and attorneys’ fees incurred to collect the unpaid amounts.

On July 30, 2017, the Court struck Defendant’s Answer. On August 14, 2018, the clerk entered Defendant’s default.

ANALYSIS

CCP § 585 permits entry of a judgment after a defendant’s default has been entered. A party seeking judgment on the default by the Court must file a Request for Court Judgment, and: (1) a brief summary of the case; (2) declarations or other admissible evidence in support of the judgment requested; (3) interest computations as necessary; (4) a memorandum of costs and disbursements; (5) a proposed form of judgment; (6) a dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought; (7) a dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment under CCP § 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment; (8) exhibits as necessary; and (9) a request for attorneys’ fees if allowed by statute or by the agreement of the parties. CRC 3.1800.

JC Form CIV-100 must be used to request court judgment. Item number 2 must be completed. Item number 8 must be completed if the Defendant is an individual. Plaintiff must submit a proposed form of judgment. Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal without prejudice of the Complaint as to all Doe defendants.

Plaintiff used JC Form CIV-100 to request court judgment. Plaintiff filled out item numbers 2 and 8 on CIV-100.

Plaintiff requests a total judgment of $97,292.57. The request comprises:

Damages: $48,650.53

Interest: $ 7,838.04

Cost: $ 3,335.00

Attorney Fees: $37,469.00

————————————————————————————–

Total: $97,292.57

By defaulting a defendant is deemed to admit all material allegations of the complaint that are well pleaded. Molen v. Friedman (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 1149, 1156. The complaint need only alleged facts sufficient to apprise a defendant of the nature of the plaintiff’s demand, and it is immaterial that the complaint might have been subject to a demurrer for failure to make an allegation necessary to state a cause of action. Id. at 1157. See also CCP § 431.20; Bristol Convalescent Hospital v. Stone (1968) 258 Cal.App.2d 848, 859 (stating that defaulting defendant admits absolute verity of all allegations of complaint giving rise to liability).

The plaintiff must prove the amount of damages before an actual entry of default judgment. See Ostling v. Loring (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 1731, 1745. In determining whether the plaintiff is entitled to an award of damages after the defendant has defaulted, the plaintiff is only required to present evidence establishing a prima facie case for damages. Johnson v. Stanhiser (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 357, 361-362. The trial court must hear the evidence offered by the plaintiff and render judgment “‘in [its] favor for such sum, not exceeding the amount stated in the complaint, or for such relief, not exceeding that demanded in the complaint, as appears from the evidence to be just. [Citations.]’” Id. at 362.

Plaintiff requests costs in the amount of $3,335.00 are based upon (1) clerk’s filing fees of $435.00; (2) process server’s fees of $1,696.60; and (3) application and motion fees of $1,203.40.

Plaintiff submits the declaration of Robert Bratton, an officer of Plaintiff, in support of the request for default judgment. Bratton Decl. ¶ 1. Plaintiff was a subcontractor of WEB, the general contractor for construction projects known as the “Courtyard Bunker Construction” and “AC Courtyard Bunker” (collectively the “Projects”). Bratton Decl. ¶ 3. On July 14, 2016 the parties entered into a subcontract in which Plaintiff was to provide goods and services for the Projects and Defendant was to pay the agreed upon total price of $47,284.00. Bratton Decl. ¶ 4, Exh. A. On December 09, 2016 the parties enter into Change Order No. 1 which revised the subcontract price to $48,650.53. Bratton Decl. ¶ 5, Exh. B. Defendant breached the agreement by failing to pay the total principal sum of $48,650.53. Bratton Decl. ¶ 6.

Plaintiff requests interest in the amount of $7,838.04 based upon the lawful rate of 10% per annum pursuant to Civil Code § 3289 accruing from the date of the last invoice, February 09, 2017, and through September 20, 2018, which totals 588 calendar days at the rate of approximately $13.33 per day. Alexander Decl. ¶ 11. Plaintiff’s requested interest is proper.

Plaintiff requests attorneys’ fees based upon the provision of the subcontract permitting attorneys’ fees for the prevailing party. Bratton Decl. Exh. A (¶ 22). Plaintiff seeks attorneys’ fees in the amount of $37,469.00 based upon:

(1) Jonathan S. Vick, a partner, spending 10.6 hours on the matter at the rate of $375 to $390/hour;

(2) Stephen M. McLoughlin, an associate, spending 7.3 hours on the matter at the rate of $340/hour; and

(3) Jillian N. Alexander, an associate, spending 93.4 hours on the matter at the rate of $325 to $335/hour. Vick Decl. ¶¶ 8-10.

Plaintiff does not submit invoices so it is unclear how 111.3 hours of attorney time were expended on this case. Although Plaintiff did file motion to compel further responses (x2) on June 12, 2018, Plaintiff does not submit sufficient evidence that the requested fees are reasonable. The amount requested for work on case appears to be excessive. LASC Local Rule 3.214 provides the fee schedule for a default case, unless otherwise determined by the Court, and pursuant to such fee schedule the amount of attorneys’ fees is $1,849.52. Accordingly, this motion is continued to October 23, 2018, 1:30 p.m. to allow additional time for Plaintiff to submit supplemental declaration supporting the request for attorneys’ fees.

The supplemental declaration must be filed by October 18, 2018 and a courtesy copy must be lodged in Department 20.

If said declaration is not filed in a timely manner, the Court will award $1,849.52 as attorney fees per LASC Local Rule 3.214.