Judge: Elaine W. Mandel, Case: 23SMCV02517, Date: 2025-03-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMCV02517    Hearing Date: March 26, 2025    Dept: P

Tentative Ruling

Walsh v. Artisanal Brewers Collective, Case no. 23SMCV02517

Hearing date March 26, 2025

Defendant Artisanal’s Counsel’s Motion to be Relieved

Plaintiff’s Motion to Enforce Settlement

Plaintiff Walsh sues defendants Artisanal Brewers Collective, LLC, Brennan’s, Yanow and Pinsky for unpaid wages, Employment Code violations and retaliation. Plaintiff seeks to enforce a settlement with Artisanal executed on 12/9/24. Decl. Lazo exh. A. Artisanal’s counsel Scherwin and Afshar move to be relieved, citing a breakdown in attorney-client relations. Decl. Scherwin/Afshar para. 2.

Defendant Artisanal’s Counsel’s Motion to be Relieved

An application to be relieved must be made on judicial counsel form MC-051 (Notice of Motion and Motion) per Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(a), MC-052 (Declaration) per CRC rule 3.1362(c), and MC-053 (Proposed Order) per CRC rule 3.1362(e). The proposed order must specify all hearing dates scheduled in the action or proceeding, including the date of trial, if known. CRC rule 3.1362(e). Counsels Scherwin and Afshar have complied with all 3.1362 requirements.

No trial has been set. The court heard arguments on 2/27/25 to advance the motion; Artisanal has had a month to arrange alternative representation. GRANTED. As an LLC, Artisanal must be represented by counsel. The court will set an OSC re failure to obtain new counsel.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Enforce Settlement

Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §664.6 provides a summary procedure that enables the court to enforce a settlement agreement by entering judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. If there are disputed facts, the trial court has authority to determine whether the parties entered into a valid and binding settlement. In re Marriage of Hasso (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 1174; Corkland v. Boscoe (1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 989. A request for the court to maintain jurisdiction must be made “(1) during the pendency of the case, not after the case has been dismissed in its entirety, (2) by the parties themselves, and (3) either in a writing signed by the parties or orally before the court.” Mesa RHF Partners, LP v. City of Los Angeles (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 913, 917.

The parties entered into a settlement agreement 12/9/24. Decl. Lazo para. 2; exh. A. Defendant was to pay $100,000 over four installments beginning 12/9/24 but has not paid anything. Decl. Lazo paras. 2-4. The parties requested the court retain jurisdiction per 664.6 to enforce the settlement, and the agreement allows bringing an enforcement action. Decl. Lazo exh. A, §18. The motion is unopposed.

Plaintiff seeks $15,000 in attorney’s fees (20 hours x $750/hour) and $60 in costs for bringing this motion, reply and hearing. The settlement allows for recovery of reasonable fees in an enforcement action. Decl. Lazo exh. A, §18(b), para. 5. The requested 20 hours for a 5-page unopposed motion is not reasonable. The court awards 6 hours x $750/hour for the motion and hearing, plus $60 in costs. Plaintiff awarded $4,560 in fees and costs, payable within 30 days. GRANTED.