Judge: Alison Mackenzie, Case: 23STCV18146, Date: 2024-02-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV18146    Hearing Date: February 22, 2024    Dept: 55

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS:  Petitioner Joaquin Martinez’s Petition For Approval Of Compromise of Claim or Action or Disposition of Proceeds of Minor.

Petitioner Joaquin Martinez brings a petition for approval of a minor’s compromise as to Claimant Irina J. Martinez, age 7, regarding a habitability complaint. The Court finds that Plaintiff provided sufficient notice of the continuance of this hearing from 2/2/24.

Courts considering whether to approve a minor’s compromise determine whether petitioners, such as guardians, are acting in the best interests of the minor. E.g., CCP §372(a)(3); Scruton v. Korean Air Lines Co. (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 1596, 1603-07. “[T]he protective role the court generally assumes in cases involving minors, [is] a role to assure that whatever is done is in the minor’s best interests….  [I]ts primary concern is whether the compromise is sufficient to provide for the minor’s injuries, care and treatment.”  Goldberg v. Sup. Ct. (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 1378, 1382.  Judicial discretion in approving petitions for minors’ compromises, and ordering distributions, and local court policies, must be applied in the best interests of minors, in a case-by-case method, tailored to the circumstances.  Christensen v. Sup. Ct. (1987) 193 Cal.App.3d 139, 142-44.

A petition for court approval of a compromise under Code of Civil Procedure section 372 must comply with California Rules of Court rules 7.950, 7.951, and 7.952. Also, courts may order that funds to be received by a minor must be deposited in a financial institution. CRC Rule 7.953(a).

Additionally, courts may consider evidence presented and determine reasonable amounts to be paid to attorneys representing minors.  Curtis v. Fagan (2000) 82 Cal. App. 4th 270, 273; Padilla v. McClellan (2001) 93 Cal. App. 4th 1100, 1106.

The settlement amount in this case ($30,000) is in the best interests of the minor. The circumstances reportedly causing injuries were as follows: “Plaintiffs have been subjected to deplorable, despicable, uninhabitable conditions including, but not limited to severe rodent and cockroach infestations; lack of heating facilities; lack of functional plumbing facilities; lack of functional kitchen; lack of functional smoke and carbon monoxide detectors; and lack of functional windows. Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the uninhabitable conditions and the issues were not resolved. Plaintiffs have suffered physical, mental and emotional damages.”  (Petition, ¶ 5.) The minor received no medical treatment and has completely recovered from injuries.  (Petition, ¶¶ 7-8.)  Given that the minor has recovered and does not need future care related to the alleged habitability issues, the Court concludes that the settlement for the minor in the sum of $30,000 (Petition, ¶ 10), is more than sufficient to provide for the minor in these circumstances.

Furthermore, the requested attorneys’ fees in the amount of $7,500.00 (Petition, ¶ 13;  Attachment 13a) are reasonable and represent the typical 25 percent requested under a contingency fee agreement for like cases involving minors’ compromises.

Finally, the Court has the discretion to order that the balance of $22,500.00 (Petition, ¶ 15) be deposited in Chase bank in a blocked account, as requested here.  (Id. at Attachment, 18b (2).)  That represents sound practice, so that a minor is required to reach the age of majority before having access to the funds and making important financial decisions.

The Petition therefore is granted. The Court will sign and file the form orders received with the petition.