Judge: Colin Leis, Case: BC700865, Date: 2023-03-29 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC700865    Hearing Date: March 29, 2023    Dept: 74

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT 

DEPARTMENT 74 

MOVING PARTIES:              Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

RESPONDING PARTY:       Defendant Clyde Williams

Motion to Vacate the Dismissal and Enforce the Settlement Agreement

The court considered the moving papers. Defendant did not file an opposition.

BACKGROUND  

            This case arises from a dispute involving an automobile accident. On May 18, 2017, Defendant Clyde Williams was involved in an automobile accident with Paulina Canales. Afterward, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (Plaintiff) paid $26,164 on behalf Ms. Canales for property damages. On April 4, 2018, Plaintiff filed a subrogation claim against Defendant Clyde Williams (Defendant) for $26,164.

            On January 2, 2019, the parties reached a settlement for $9,565.73. (Mahfouz Decl., ¶ 6; Ex. A.) Under the settlement, Defendant’s insurance carrier would pay $3,565.73 and Defendant would pay the remaining $6,000 in installments of $25 per month. (Mahfouz Decl., ¶ 6; Ex. A.) If Defendant defaulted, then Plaintiff’s counsel would provide written notice and Defendant would have 10 days to make the payment. (Mahfouz Decl., ¶ 6; Ex. A.) And if Defendant failed to remedy the default, Plaintiff’s counsel would have the right to submit an order to the court for entry of judgment for the principal amount of $26,164 plus interest. (Mahfouz Decl., ¶ 6; Ex. A.)

            On February 6, 2019, the court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint against Defendant without prejudice. However, the court retained jurisdiction to make orders and enforce any and all terms of the settlement, including judgment.

            Defendant failed to make the necessary payments and Plaintiff’s counsel provided Defendant written notice in September 2022, November 2022, and January 2022. (Mahfouz Decl., ¶ 9; Ex. B.) To date, Defendant has failed to remedy the default. (Motion, at p. 3.)

            On February 1, 2023, Plaintiff filed this motion vacate the dismissal, enforce the settlement agreement, and enter judgment.

DISCUSSION 

            Vacate Dismissal and Enforce Settlement.

            If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties . . . for settlement of the case . . . the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 664.6.)

            Here, Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 permits the court to vacate the dismissal and reinstate the case. Moreover, on February 6, 2019, the court retained jurisdiction to enforce any and all terms of settlement, including judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., § 664.6.) Under the terms of the Settlement, then, Defendant must pay Plaintiff the principal amount plus interest, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees, less any payments made by Defendant and Defendant’s insurance carrier.

            Thus, the court grants Defendant’s motion.

            Interest, Costs, and Attorney’s Fees.

            “A person who is entitled to recover damages certain, or capable of being made certain by calculation, and the right to recover which is vested in the person upon a particular day, is entitled to also recovery interest thereon from that day . . .” (Civ. Code, § 3287, subd. (a). Here, the settlement provides that in event judgment is entered against Defendant, he would owe $26,164 plus interest. (Mahfouz Decl., ¶ 6, Ex. A.) Plaintiff calculates that interest amounts to $1,002, which accrued at the legal rate of seven percent per annum since the default date of July 15, 2022. (Mahfouz Decl., ¶ 12.)

            “A prevailing party is entitled to as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1032, subd. (b).) Here, Plaintiff has incurred recoverable costs in the amount of $570. (Motion, at p. 6.) In a Memorandum of Costs, Plaintiff calculates that the amount includes a $435 filing fee for Plaintiff’s complaint, a $75 service of process fee, and a $60 motion fee. (Motion, at p. 6.)

            Local Rule 3.214 provides that whenever the obligation sued upon provides for the recovery of a reasonable attorney fee, the fee may be fixed pursuant to the following schedule: $10,000.01 to $50,000, $690 plus 3% of the excess over $10,000. (Super Ct. L.A. County, Local Rules, rule 3.214.) Here, the settlement provides that reasonable attorney’s fees are recoverable. (Mahfouz Decl., ¶ 6, Ex. A.) Accordingly, since the principal amount owed in the case is $26,164, Plaintiff is entitled to $1,174.92 in attorney’s fees. (Motion, at p. 6.)

            Thus, Defendant owes Plaintiff $24,345.19 (principal settlement amount ($26,164.00), plus interest ($1,002), plus costs ($570), plus attorney’s fees ($1,174.92), minus payments received from Defendant’s insurance carrier ($4,565.73).

CONCLUSION

                Based on the foregoing, the court grants Plaintiff’s motions to vacate the dismissal and enforce the settlement agreement.

            The court shall sign the proposed judgment for Plaintiff in the amount of $24,345.19.

            Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 DATED:  ¿March 29, 2023¿ 

_____________________________ 

Colin Leis 

Judge of the Superior Court