CASE#: MSC11-00845

CASE NAME: PSC INDUSTRIAL OUTSOURCING, LP

HEARING ON MOTION TO/FOR VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT FILED BY

BENNINGTON GROUP, LLC, ABUL SHAH

* TENTATIVE RULING: *

The motion by defendants Bennington Group LLC (“BGLLC”) and Abul Shah (“Shah”) (together, “defendants”) to set aside the default judgment is denied.

Defendants argue, first, that as to Shah, the default judgment is void because it exceeds the relief demanded in the Complaint. Code of Civil Procedure Section 580.  The prayer for relief, as to the eleventh cause of action for fraud, the sole cause of action stated against Shah, asks only for “damages according to proof at trial.”  Amended Complaint, p. 13.  Where specific damage allegations in the complaint provide notice to defendant of the amount sought, however, the award of damages in a default judgment may exceed the amount specified in the prayer.  Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal. 3d 822, 829-830.  Here, the complaint clearly alleged that Shah’s actions harmed PSC Industrial Outsourcing, LP (“PSC”) by inducing PSC to perform services by promising to pay a contracted amount.  Amended Complaint, ¶ 51.  Elsewhere in the Amended Complaint, the amount alleged to be owed to PSC under that agreement is specifically stated multiple times:  $164,717.73.  Amended Complaint ¶¶ 20, 21, 24 and 27.   That is the amount awarded against defendants, before interest, attorneys’ fees and costs.  Shah had notice of this amount as required under Code of Civil Procedure Section 580.

Defendants next argue that the default judgment is void because the interest awarded exceeds the “legal rate” of ten percent.  In PSC’s counsel’s declaration in support of the request for default judgemtn to be entered, counsel clearly states that 18% interest annually is sought, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Guaranty for the contract at issue, entered into by Bennington Group West, Inc. and BGLLC.  Amended Complaint, Exhibit B.

Finally, the court finds that the documentation submitted by PSC in support of its request for entry of default judgment was sufficient to meet the requirements of California Rules of Court Rule 3.1800.

For the reasons stated, the motion to set aside the default judgment is denied.

Evidentiary Rulings:

PSC’s Request for Judicial Notice is granted as to Exhibits 1 through 9.  Evidence Code Section 452 (d).