JACQUELINE CASARES ET AL VS WE ARE FAMILY TRANSPORTATION INC

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: ****8808    Hearing Date: October 26, 2020    Dept: 28

Request for Default Judgment

Having considered all documents submitted in support of a default judgment, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On January 30, 2017, Plaintiff Jaqueline Casares (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants We Are Family Transportation, Inc. and We Are Family, Inc. (collectively “Defendants”). The complaint alleges negligence for an automobile collision that occurred on March 26, 2015.

On September 3, 2019, the Court entered default against Defendant We Are Family Transportation, Inc.

On December 17, 2019, the Court entered default against Defendant We Are Family, Inc.

On January 6, 2020, the Court dismissed Does 1 through 10.

On April 24, 2020, the Court denied Plaintiff’s applications for default judgment against Defendants filed on December 17, 2019.

On July 6, 2020, Plaintiff filed applications for default judgment against Defendants.

Orders to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for a Failure to Enter Default as to Defendants are scheduled for January 11, 2021.

PARTY’S REQUEST

Plaintiff requests the Court to enter a default judgment against Defendants and award Plaintiff $1,011,922.28.

DISCUSSION

The Court finds default judgment may be entered against Defendant We Are Family Transportation, Inc. On August 2, 2018, Plaintiff filed a statement of damages and its proof of service on Defendant We Are Family Transportation, Inc. This statement of damages was served on Defendant We Are Family Transportation, Inc. on July 11, 2018, nearly two months before default was entered against Defendant We Are Family Transportation, Inc. This was a timely service of the statement of damages. (See Schwab v. Southern California Gas Co. (2004) 114 Cal.App.4th 1308, 1323.)

Moreover, Plaintiff’s requested special damages are properly awarded. Plaintiff has provided prima facie evidence of Plaintiff’s sustaining of $7,347.00 in special damages. The Court found on April 24, 2020 that Plaintiff did not evidence damages totaling Defendant We Are Family Transportation, Inc.’s accepted liability for $50,584.74 and damages in excess of that. However, Plaintiff’s attorney clarifies in a declaration here that Defendant We Are Family Transportation, Inc. did not accept liability for $50,584.74, but rather Plaintiff’s insurance paid that figure. Plaintiff is entitled to damages from Defendant We Are Family Transportation, Inc. regardless of whether Plaintiff’s insurance company paid for the expenses. (See Helfend v. Southern California Rapid Transit (1970) 2 Cal.3d 1, 3.)

Additionally, Plaintiff has provided a sufficient calculation for the requested prejudgment interest of $3,837.09 and a sufficient explanation of the requested $738.19 in costs.

However, Plaintiff has not shown an entitlement to $1,000,000.00 in general damages. The Court must view the evidence submitted in determining whether a particular amount of general damages would compensate for pain and suffering, emotional distress, and other non-quantifiable damages that flow from quantifiable damages. (See Licudine v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 881, 892.) Plaintiff has submitted evidence of sustaining $7,347.00 in special damages from being dislodged from her seat in a moving vehicle driven by Defendants driver. Plaintiff was launched onto pavement. Images are lodged showing scaring and bruising. This is insufficient to show $1,000,000.00 would compensate Plaintiff. Rather, the Court finds that $100,000.000 is a sufficient amount of general damages considering Plaintiff’s injuries and special damages.

The Court finds the application filed against Defendant We Are Family, Inc. cannot be approved. The only evidence of a statement of damages with an attached proof of service is the statement of damages filed on August 2, 2018. This statement of damages was served on Defendant We Are Family Transportation, Inc., not Defendant We Are Family, Inc. Since there is no proof of service of a statement of damages served on Defendant We Are Family, Inc., the Court cannot grant default judgment against it.

CONCLUSION

The application for default judgment against Defendant We Are Family Transportation, Inc. is APPROVED for the amount of $111,922.28.

The application for default judgment against Defendant We Are Family, Inc. is DENIED.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.