Tajima LLP represented a California business facing a six-figure claim after the clerk entered default for failure to respond to the complaint. With the plaintiff preparing to seek a default judgment, the client faced the prospect of losing without a determination on the merits.
The Challenge
The business owner had been receiving treatment for a serious medical condition and reasonably, but mistakenly, believed an insurance representative was managing the defense. Tajima LLP first requested a stipulation setting aside the default. When the plaintiff refused, the firm moved for relief and presented the circumstances that had prevented a timely response.
Restoring the Case to the Merits
After the motion was filed, the plaintiff changed course and stipulated to set aside the default. The threatened default proceedings were removed from the calendar, and the client was permitted to answer the complaint.
That result changed the case's leverage. The plaintiff could no longer rely on a procedural victory and instead had to prove liability and damages through litigation.
Reframing the Damages
The plaintiff's six-figure valuation depended substantially on emotional-distress damages. Tajima LLP maintained that this component was not recoverable under the negligence and contract-based theories supported by the record. The evidence also did not establish the intentional misconduct required for the plaintiff's alternative theory.
With that component removed from the analysis, the remaining out-of-pocket and other actual damages were limited. Tajima LLP used focused discovery to test the claimed exposure and pressed the damages issue throughout negotiations.
The Resolution
Near the end of the case, Tajima LLP noticed the plaintiff's deposition to test her claims under oath. The deposition notice prompted accelerated settlement discussions, during which the plaintiff substantially reduced her demand to a level acceptable to the client.
The matter resolved for more than 85% below the plaintiff's opening settlement demand, on terms acceptable to the client, with a comprehensive release and dismissal with prejudice.
The result reflects a disciplined defense strategy: restore the client's ability to litigate on the merits, identify the damages the evidence and governing law can support, and negotiate from a record built to withstand scrutiny.