Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 22STCV02588, Date: 2024-04-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV02588    Hearing Date: April 9, 2024    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.  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. 

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court has reviewed the petition filed on March 18, 2024 by Petitioner Nakeithia Robinson (Petitioner) on behalf of Claimant Khalon Madison, age 15. The Court denies the petition without prejudice for the following reason:

On July 14, 2022, the Court appointed Tavis Lurry as guardian ad litem for Khalon Madison. On March 21, 2024, Petitioner filed an ex parte order to appoint Nakeithia Robinson as guardian ad litem for Khalon Madison, which was rejected. Since Claimant is a minor, the Court will only review a petition filed Khalon Madison’s appointed guardian ad litem. Since Petitioner is not the guardian ad litem, the petition is denied.

In the event Petitioner is appointed guardian ad litem in the future, Petitioner must file a petition using the most updated form MC-350 (revised Jan. 1, 2021). Additionally, the Court notes the following defects:

This case involves a motor vehicle accident that occurred on January 23, 2020, while Claimant was a passenger on a tour bus. The medical records show that on the date of the accident, Claimant was transported by ambulance to Long Beach Memorial, suffering from head trauma and visible bleeding. Claimant then left the hospital against the advice of medical providers because Claimant’s mother stated they needed to make their return flight home to Florida. Upon returning to Florida, Claimant was seen at the emergency room on January 27, 2020 complaining of mid-back pain and headache. Claimant was prescribed ibuprofen and discharged. Petitioner also includes a medical report from Chiropractic Clinics of South Florida P.L., dated March 10, 2020, diagnosing Claimant with traumatic cervicalgia injury and traumatic lumbago injury and recommending treatment. This is the most recent medical record. Therefore, Petitioner must include recent records verifying that Claimant is fully recovered from his injuries.

In item 11c, Petitioner must describe in more detail the terms of the settlement.

According to the amounts in item 12b(5), the amount in item 12b(1) should be $68,000.

Petitioner must note a value in item 13b.

Petitioner requests $4,000 in attorney fees which represents 40% of the gross settlement. However, the Court finds this amount is not supported by the declaration of counsel. The Court would approve 33% based on the information provided. 

In item 15b, Petitioner represents that she has paid or will be obligated to pay the medical expenses, attorney fees and other expenses. Petitioner must attach proof of the expenses incurred and payments made or obligations to pay the expenses. If instead, the expenses will be paid directly from the settlement, then Petitioner should select item 15a.

It appears Petitioner’s attorney is representing the other plaintiffs in this action. If this is true, Petitioner must change the response in item 18e and include the relevant attachment.

Petitioner checks item 19a, stating there is a guardianship of the estate of the minor. It does not appear on the face of the record that there is a guardianship of the estate, but merely that a guardian ad litem was appointed. If this is true, then Petitioner should select 19b and then the appropriate subsection, instead.  Additionally, the value sought to be deposited must match the net amount in item 17f.

Since Petitioner appears to have the funds deposited in a blocked account, Petitioner must also complete and file form MC-355.

Accordingly, the Court denies the petition without prejudice.

Petitioner shall give notice and file a proof of service of such.