Case Number: BC657979 Hearing Date: February 22, 2018 Dept: 53

ENVERTO vs. MARKHAM & SONS, INC., et al. ; BC657979, FEBRUARY 22, 2018

[Tentative] Order RE: PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT MARKHAM & SONS, INC.

Plaintiff Enverto (“Plaintiff”) requests that the Court enter default judgment against Defendant Markham & Sons, Inc. (“Defendant”).

The Court notes the following deficiencies with Plaintiff’s default judgment packet:

· Plaintiff’s Complaint makes no allegation of a statutory or contractual basis for attorney’s fees; indeed, the Complaint does not even pray for attorney’s fees. Moreover, Plaintiff’s attorney’s fee request does not comply with LASC Rule 3.214, nor is it supported by a declaration explaining why a greater amount should be awarded.

· Plaintiff’s Complaint is on a written obligation to pay money, i.e., the subject Lease Agreement. However, Plaintiff has failed to provide the original Lease Agreement, or in the alternative, a declaration explaining loss or unavailability of the original with a proposed order to accept a copy in lieu of the original pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1806.

· The Declaration of Logan Murphy in support of the default judgment is also insufficient to support the damages requested. For one, per the Declaration, the monthly lease payment is $3,576.31. (Murphy Decl., ¶ 4.) However, the attached copy of the Lease Agreement shows that the monthly lease payment is $1,788.15. (Murphy Decl., Ex. 1.) Further, the Declaration fails to establish when Defendant defaulted on the Lease Agreement such that there is insufficient support for the total default amount of $98.765.67.

The Court orders that Plaintiff correct the above deficiencies and resubmit the default judgment packet. This OSC hearing is continued to March 23, 2018 at 8:30 AM so that Plaintiff may comply with the above requirements.

DATED: February 22, 2018

_____________________________

Howard L. Halm

Judge of the Superior Court