Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 22STCV36104, Date: 2024-11-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV36104    Hearing Date: November 22, 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

BACKGROUND

This is a consolidated action stemming from an incident that occurred on August 28, 2022 at the Move for MDS Walk in Griffith Park, Los Angeles. (See Min. Order, 3/19/24.) All the plaintiffs allege injuries that occurred after an LED wall allegedly fell on attendees.

The four consolidated cases are 22STCV36104 (Iraca et al. v. That’s Your Ballgame LLC, et al.), 22STCV36727 (Geltch v. That’s Your Ballgame, LLC, et al.), 23STCV03426 (Butchko v. TSV Sound & Vision LLC, et al.), and 23STCV04630 (Cottrell, et al. v. TSV Sound & Vision LLC, et al.)

Defendants That’s Your Ballgame LLC and Matthew Todd Cooper (“Defendants”) now move for an order to deposit their settlement of $1,020,000 with the Court until the Plaintiffs in the consolidated cases agree on an apportionment; that they be discharged from further liability; dismissed from the cases; and be awarded $2,250 in costs and attorney fees. No opposition has been filed.

LEGAL STANDARD

Code of Civil Procedure, section 386, subdivision (b) provides that: “Any person, firm, corporation, association or other entity against whom double or multiple claims are made, or may be made, by two or more persons which are such that they may give rise to double or multiple liability, may bring an action against the claimants to compel them to interplead and litigate their several claims.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 386, subd. (b).)  “When the person, firm, corporation, association or other entity against whom such claims are made, or may be made, is a defendant in an action brought upon one or more of such claims, it … may bring a separate action against the claimants to compel them to interplead and litigate their several claims.  The action of interpleader may be maintained although the claims have not a common origin, are not identical but are adverse to and independent of one another, or the claims are unliquidated and no liability on the part of the party bringing the action or filing the cross–complaint has arisen.”  (Ibid.) 

“Where the only relief sought against one of the defendants is the payment of a stated amount of money alleged to be wrongfully withheld, such defendant may, upon affidavit that he is a mere stakeholder with no interest in the amount or any portion thereof and that conflicting demands have been made upon him for the amount by parties to the action, upon notice to such parties, apply to the court for an order discharging him from liability and dismissing him from the action on his depositing with the clerk of the court the amount in dispute and the court may, in its discretion, make such order.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 386.5.) 

Code of Civil Procedure section 386.6 adds, in pertinent part:

“A party to an action who follows the procedure set forth in Section 386 or 386.5 may insert in his motion, petition, complaint, or cross complaint a request for allowance of his costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred in such action. In ordering the discharge of such party, the court may, in its discretion, award such party his costs and reasonable attorney fees from the amount in dispute which has been deposited with the court. At the time of final judgment in the action the court may make such further provision for assumption of such costs and attorney fees by one or more of the adverse claimants as may appear proper.”

(Code Civ. Proc., § 386.6, subd. (a).) 

DISCUSSION

Defendants and Plaintiffs in the Iraca, Geltch, Butchko, and Cottrell actions, have agreed to a settlement for $1,000,000 and $5,000 medical expense coverage per claimant. (Pardo Decl. ¶ 2, Exh. A.) However, the agreement has not been executed because Plaintiffs have not agreed on an apportionment of the settlement funds. (Id. ¶ 6.) According to Defendants, the Plaintiffs have agreed to interpleading the funds until the apportionment is resolved. (Id., Exh. E.)

It appears notice has been served on each of the adverse claimants to the funds pursuant to section 386.5. The supporting declaration for this motion states that “Movants claim no interest in the money described above and wish to deposit the same with this Court and to be discharged from any further liability to any of said claimants.” (Pardo Decl. ¶ 7.)

No opposition has been filed. Therefore, because Defendants have disclaimed any interest in the settlement funds, the motion to deposit the funds with the Court, be discharged from liability, and dismissed, is granted.

Defendants also seek $2,250 in reimbursement for attorney fees under section 386.6. This represents a $450 hourly rate for five hours of work. The Court finds this amount is excessive given the type of motion and because it is unopposed. Therefore, the Court reduces attorney fees to $900 (two hours at the $450 hourly rate). Because this amount will be subtracted from the $1,020,000 settlement, the new amount to be deposited with the Court is $1,019,100.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Therefore, the Motion for Order Discharging Stakeholders and for Orders Awarding Costs and Fees, and for Dismissal is GRANTED. Defendants may deposit the $1,019,100 settlement funds with the Court. 

Upon deposit, Defendants will be dismissed from the above consolidated action. Defendants shall file and serve a proposed order upon deposit.

Defendants shall provide notice of the Court’s ruling and file a proof of service of such.