Yu v. Liberty Surplus Ins. Corp.
California Court of Appeal, 5th District
1Opinion of the Court
MOORE, ACTING P. J.
*1027Generally, as a fundamental rule, when a civil litigant sues for monetary damages, "the amount demanded must be stated." ( Code Civ. Proc., § 425.10, subd. (a)(2).)1 A demand for "damages according to proof" is insufficient; such a demand does not *104provide adequate notice to sustain a default judgment. (§ 585, subds. (a) & (b).)
Here, Bann-Shiang Liza Yu hired Automatic Teller Modules, Inc. (ATMI), a general contractor, to design and build a hotel. After the hotel opened, Yu filed a complaint against ATMI for construction defects, praying for "not less than $10 million…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Angelucci v. Century Supper ClubCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- Greenup v. RodmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
- Rochin v. Pat Johnson Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1998
- Sickle v. GilbertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Engebretson & Co. v. HarrisonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ins. Co. of Pa. v. Am. Safety Indem. Co., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Daneshmand v. City of San Juan CapistranoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021
- Daneshmand v. City of San Juan Capistrano CA4/3California Court of Appeal · 2021
- Ins. Co. of St. of PA v. Amer. Safety Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 2019
- Radovic v. Brilliant CA2/3California Court of Appeal · 2020