Judge: Cynthia A Freeland, Case: 37-2018-00051490-CL-PA-NC, Date: 2023-11-17 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

SOUTH BUILDING TENTATIVE RULINGS - November 16, 2023

11/17/2023  01:30:00 PM  N-27 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Cynthia A. Freeland

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Limited  PI/PD/WD - Auto Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2018-00051490-CL-PA-NC STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY VS RODRIGUEZ CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion to Vacate, 09/14/2023

Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company ('Plaintiff')'s motion to vacate dismissal and enter judgment against Defendant Joseph Rodriguez ('Defendant') is granted.

On October 9, 2018, Plaintiff commenced this action by filing a Complaint against Defendant and Defendant Kendra Rodriguez for subrogation and alleging an outstanding debt of $8,551.82. See ROA No. 1. On June 25, 2020, Plaintiff and Defendant executed a Stipulation for Dismissal with Reservation to Vacate and Enter Judgment Upon Breach (the 'Stipulation') under which Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff $6,742.66 as follows: (1) an initial payment of $4,742.66 by May 1, 2020, and then (2) beginning on July 1, 2020, monthly installments in the amount of $100.00 due on the same day each month until paid in full. See Reese Decl., Ex. A. In exchange, Plaintiff agreed to dismiss this action without prejudice provided that Defendant accomplished timely and proper payments. Paragraph 3 of the Stipulation provides that: If defendant fails to make a timely payment, said failure is a material breach. In such event, plaintiff will mail defendant a letter advising that a payment has not been received. If the payment is not made within 14 days, then plaintiff will be entitled to have any dismissal in this action set aside and judgment entered for the settlement amount, minus credit for payments received, plus any costs the court requires to enter judgment or costs associated with any procedure to have the judgment entered. Plaintiff shall be entitled to said judgment upon submission of a declaration by plaintiff's counsel showing the breach and requesting that judgment be entered. Plaintiff shall provide written notice of such request to defendant.

Defendant may cure the default(s) by bringing all payments current prior to entry of judgment and submitting such proof to plaintiff's counsel and the Court before entry of judgment. Otherwise, judgment shall be entered as set forth in this paragraph. The parties stipulate that the court shall retain jurisdiction pursuant to CCP 664.6 to enforce this agreement.

See Stipulation, ¶ 3.

On May 28, 2020, the court served a Notice of Dismissal by Court indicating that the matter would be deemed dismissed without prejudice unless the parties: (1) filed a judgment or dismissal, or (2) appeared ex parte and showed good cause why the case should not be dismissed. See ROA No. 30.

Neither occurred, and the matter was deemed dismissed without prejudice on July 11, 2020 (the 'Dismissal Order'). Plaintiff now moves to set aside the Dismissal Order and for entry of judgment owing to Defendant's failure to make payments under the Stipulation.

California Code of Civil Procedure ('CCP') § 664.6(a) provides that: Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3020234 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE  37-2018-00051490-CL-PA-NC If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside of the presence of the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, 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.

Cal. Code Civ. P. § 664.6(a). Upon a motion for entry of judgment under CCP § 664.6, the trial court's role is to determine whether the parties entered into a valid and binding agreement for settlement of all or part of a case. In making that determination, the court may rely upon submitted declarations alone.

See Skulnick v. Roberts Express, Inc. (2002) 2 Cal. App. 4th 884, 889.

The court construes Defendant's lack of opposition as a concession of the motion's merits. See San Diego Rules of Court, Rule 2.1.19.B. In addition, the uncontroverted evidence establishes that: (1) Defendant's insurance carrier has made a one-time payment in the amount of $4,742.66, and (2) Defendant has made monthly payments totaling $650.00. However, Defendant is presently in default under the Stipulation. See Reese Decl., ¶¶ 4-5. On April 25, 2023, Plaintiff's counsel sent Defendant and his attorney a default letter regarding the missed payments. Ibid., ¶ 6; Ex. B. Defendant did not cure the default within 14 days of receipt of the default letter. Ibid., ¶ 7. The foregoing constitutes good cause to grant the motion.

In light of the foregoing, the court grants the motion and: (1) sets aside the Dismissal Order, and (2) enters judgment in Plaintiff's favor and against Defendant in the total amount of $2,205.50 ($6,742.66 principal amount owed, less $5,006.66 in payments received, plus $469.50 in costs incurred). Ibid., ¶ 8.

This is the tentative ruling for the hearing at 1:30 p.m. on Friday, November 17, 2023. If no party appears at the hearing, this tentative ruling will become the order of the court as of November 17, 2023.

If the parties are satisfied with the court's tentative ruling or do not otherwise wish to argue the motion, they are encouraged to give notice to the court and each other of their intention not to appear, though this notice is not required.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3020234