Rodriguez

Rodriguez v. Nam Min Cho

Good Law
187 Cal. Rptr. 3d 227·2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 383·236 Cal. App. 4th 742
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 7, 2015B256985California4,737 words

Opinion

Opinion

Flier, J.

Nam Min Cho appeals from an order denying his motion to set aside the default judgment in this action. Cho raises two main contentions, one relating to purportedly improper or fraudulent service of the summons and complaint, and the second relating to the amount of damages awarded in the default judgment. We find the first contention lacks merit but the second does not. We hold the default judgment is void because it exceeded the amount of damages stated in the complaint. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions.

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

1. Allegations of Complaint

Dulce Rodriguez filed a complaint on July 11, 2011, against defendants Cho and Reliable Building Maintenance (Reliable), alleging Cho did business as Reliable. The complaint alleged defendants employed Rodriguez as a “housekeeper” at the Los Angeles County courthouse in Pomona from September 2005 to November 2010. Rodriguez’s husband also worked for defendants at the same location. When she finished her shift, she would stay and assist her husband with his cleaning. Defendants knew of her overtime work and did not object, and they did not pay her overtime.

In 2009, Rodriguez filed a claim with the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.