Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 19STCV22153, Date: 2023-07-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV22153    Hearing Date: August 3, 2023    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely (which is highly encouraged).  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

RULING

The Court has reviewed the petition filed by Petitioner Guy Spano (“Petitioner”) for Claimant Lance Petersen (“Claimant”). The Petition is DENIED without prejudice for the following reasons:

(1)   Petitioner has not attached the relevant medical bills and letters accepting negotiated reductions other than the Medi-Cal lien letter.

(2)   Counsel’s declaration is insufficient to justify the attorney’s fees request, particularly in light of the total settlement.  Counsel is provide further justification for the 40% sought, or, in the alternative, the Court will approve 33% based on the information provided.

(3)   The Court requires further explanation as to the apportionment of the proceeds, i.e., a specified amount to be invested in a single premium deferred annuity and another amount to be paid to claimant. In particular, the Court requires further explanation as to the amount to be paid to claimant, as the Petition expresses concern over financial decisions. (See Item 8.c.)

(4)   Provide the amount for which each Defendant is responsible for in Item 10b.

Petitioner is to provide notice of the Court’s ruling and file a proof of service of such.