Cas@ 5:21-cv-01987-RGK-RAO Document 78 Filed 01/11/23 Pagelof3 Page ID #:894 8 JS6 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ol 2 12 | CENTURY SURETY COMPANY, Case No.: 5:21-cv-01987-RGK (RAOx) A > sx 13 Plaintiff, District Judge R. Gary Klausner ~ 828 Magistrate Judge Rozella A. Oliver eeeel4] v. Sb°CSs Ss gS 15 | POPELINO’S TRANSPORTATION, INC. | PROPOSED} JUDGMENT Rage a corporation, JOSE POPELINO, an D232 16 | individual, JOSE BARRAGAN, an m3 individual, POPELINO’S GREEN WASTE 2 @~ 17 |RECYCLING, a business entity of unknown § form, ROSARIO RIOS, an individual, S = 18 | JUSTICE CUTS D/B/A RECYCLING 8 AND RECOVERY, a corporation, 19 | RICHARD BOYD, an individual, ELISA BOYD, an individual, and D&R WOODS 20 | ENTERPRISE CORP., a corporation, 21 Defendants. 22 23 This action came before the Court pursuant to Plaintiff Century Surety 24 || Company’s (“Century’s”) motion for summary judgment. The Court, exercising its 25 | discretion, construed the Motion as a motion for summary judgment against D&R 26 || Woods Enterprise Corporation (D&R Woods”) and as a motion for default judgment 27 | against the defendants in default, Popelino’s Transportation, Inc., (“PTI”) Jose 28 || Barragan, Popelino’s Green Waste Recycling, (“PGWR”) Rosario Rios, Justice Cuts

FPROPOSED JUDGMENT] 980194.1

Cas@ 5:21-cv-01987-RGK-RAO Document 78 Filed 01/11/23 Page 20f3 Page ID #:895

1 | dba Recycling and Recovery, Richard Boyd, and Elisa Boyd. 2 Based upon the papers and evidence submitted by the parties IT IS HEREBY 3 | ORDERED THAT: 4 (1) Judgment is entered in favor of Century on all causes of action 5 | and prayers for relief in its First Amended Complaint. The Court finds that Century is 6 | entitled to rescind the policy it issued to Jose Barragan and PTI because of the 7 | concealment of material information in the application for the policy. Jose Barragan 8 | and PTI did not disclose the existence of PGWR, or its recycling operations, in the 9 | application for the policy that was intended to cover PTI’s trucking operations. As the 10 | Court enters judgment in Century’s favor on its cause of action for rescission, the . 1 | policy is rendered void ab initio, and Century owes no duty to defend or indemnify ~ 8 i 12 | PTI, Jose Barragan or PGWR in the underlying Rios and D&R Woods actions

_ x 13 | pursuant to the Century insurance policy issued to PTI. Because neither D&R Woods iss 5 5 = 14 | nor any other defendant has offered evidence to create a genuine dispute of fact, the 2 28 15 | Court grants summary judgment against D&R Woods. 5 □ 16 (2) Plaintiff Century is to refund all premiums paid for the Century policy. . . . 4 ei (3) The Court also finds that default judgment against defendants Popelino’s

= = 18 | Transportation, Inc., Jose Barragan, Popelino’s Green Waste Recycling, Rosario Rios, ~ 19 | Justice Cuts dba Recycling and Recovery, Richard Boyd, and Elisa Boyd is warranted. 20 | Once default was entered by the clerk, all factual allegations in the complaint except 21 | those relating to the amount of damages are taken as true. Televideo Sys., Inc. v. 22 | Heidenthal,

(9th Cir. 1987). The Court finds that the allegations 23 | in the complaint are sufficient, and there is no genuine dispute of material facts. Also, 24 | there is no evidence of excusable neglect in defendants' failure to respond to the 25 | complaint. The procedural requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2) are satisfied, and 26 | the factors set forth in Eitel v. McCool,

, 1471- 72 (9th Cir. 1986) weigh 27 | in favor of granting default judgment. The Court therefore enters default judgments 28 | against defendants Popelino’s Transportation, Inc., Jose Barragan, Popelino’s Green oe01941 [PROPOSED JUDGMENT]

Casq 5:21-cv-01987-RGK-RAO Document 78 Filed 01/11/23 Page 3o0f3 Page ID #:896

1 | Waste Recycling, Rosario Rios, Justice Cuts dba Recycling and Recovery, Richard 2 | Boyd, and Elisa Boyd. 3 (4) The Court further finds that, because there is no duty to defend PTI, Jose 4 | Barragan or PGWR for the Rios and/or D&R Woods actions, Century is entitled to > [recoup the costs it has incurred in defending those actions pursuant to Buss v. Superior 6 | Court,

(1997). Defendants PTI and/or Jose Barragan are ordered to 7 |reimburse Century Surety Company in the amount of $50,774.59, for defense costs 8 | and attorney’s fees Century incurred, pursuant to Buss v. Superior Ct. (1997)

| 4th 35. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED. 4 11 All remaining dates, if any are vacated. The Clerk shall close this action. < 12 . 01/11/2023 . i Ceca Ns DATED: By: 5 8 = 1s Hon. R. Gary Klausner BES : 14 United States District Judge Sees 15 ia] 16 oes Zu 18 6 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 oS [PROPOSED JUDGMENT]