Judge: Gail Killefer, Case: 21STCV20551, Date: 2022-08-09 Tentative Ruling



Case Number: 21STCV20551    Hearing Date: August 9, 2022    Dept: 37

HEARING DATE:                 August 9, 2022

CASE NUMBER:                  21STCV20551

CASE NAME:                        Paola De Leon, et al. v. Giant Stone Investment, LLC, et al.

TRIAL DATE:                        None—Taken Off Calendar

PROOF OF SERVICE:          OK                 

                                                                                                                                                           

MOTION:                               Petitions to Confirm Minors’ Compromise

MOVING PARTIES:             Plaintiffs, Paola De Leon, as guardian ad litem for Abraham Ramos, Annia Ramos, Adan Ramos and Alexander Ramos

OPPOSING PARTIES:          Defendants, Giant Stone Investments, LLC

OPPOSITION:                       None

                                                                                                                                                           

TENTATIVE:                         Plaintiffs’ Petitions to Approve Compromise are GRANTED. Plaintiffs are to provide notice.

 

                                                                                                                                                           

Background

This is a habitability action arising in connection with an apartment building located at 8001 Reseda Blvd., Apt. No. 309 Reseda, CA 91335 (the “Apartment”)  and owned and managed by Defendants, Giant Stone Investment, LLC. (“Defendant”). Plaintiffs, Paola De Leon, an individual, Jose Ramos, an individual, and minors by and through their guardian ad litem Paola De Leon, Alexander Ramos, Abraham Ramos, Adan Ramos, and Annia Ramos (“Plaintiffs”) are tenants of the Apartment from approximately May 2016 to present.

Plaintiffs allege that Defendants breached the warranty of habitability in connection with the Apartment by failing to correct its substandard conditions, including, but not limited to deficiencies with improper maintenance and insect infestations for the years 2016 to present.

Plaintiffs’ Complaint alleges the following causes of action: (1) breach of warranty of habitability, (2) breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment, (3) negligence, and (4) breach of contract.

Plaintiffs  now bring expedited petitions to confirm minor’s compromise on behalf of minors, Alexander Ramos, Abraham Ramos, Adan Ramos, and Annia Ramos, respectively. 

According to Attachment 13 to each Petition, the parties have reached a total settlement of $65,000 which allocated settlement funds to each minor as follows:

1.      Alexander Ramos: $5,000

2.      Abraham Ramos: $5,000

3.      Adan Ramos: $5,000

4.      Annia Ramos: $5,000

Petition to Approve Compromise of Pending Action

NAME OF MINORS:                       Alexander Ramos (age 11); Abraham Ramos (age 7); Adan Ramos (age 5); Annia Ramos (age 9)

GUARDIAN AD LITEM:               Paola De Leon

NAME OF DEFENDANTS:           Giant Stone Investment, LLC.

As a preliminary note, the below calculation pertains to each of the three petitions to confirm minor’s compromise before the court today.

Settlement                                                       $  5,000.00

Medical Expenses                                           $          0.00

Attorney’s Fees                                               $   1,2500.00

Litigation Costs                                              $       Varies

TOTAL TO BE PAID TO MINOR            $  3,258.41-51, 3,358.11 depending on the minor

                                                                       

A.        General Requirements

Petition on MC-350?                                      Yes                 

B.        Type of Injury

Medical records documenting injuries?          Minors allege no injuries (Attachment 9)

Negotiated reduction in medical liens?           N/A

Injuries completely healed?                            N/A

C.        Handling of Funds

Disposal of Settlement Funds:                        N/A

 

D.        Attorney’s Fees & Litigation Costs

Attorney’s Fees Requested?                           Yes

Attorney Declaration? [CRC 7.955(b)]          Yes   

Copy of Retention Agreement?                      Yes

Litigation costs requested?                             Yes

E.        Conclusion

The petition contains all required information and is APPROVED.

ANALYSIS:

Proposed Settlement Amount

A claim by or against a minor may be settled through compromise only with the approval of the court.  A petition for approval must be presented to the court by the minor’s guardian.           (CCP § 372; see Probate Code §§ 2500-2507, 3413-3605.)

The court should consider the following factors: the circumstances of the incident, particularly the facts bearing on the payor’s liability and the minor’s damages; the amount of the proposed settlement; the method of payment; the nature of the injury and the minor’s current medical status (the petition should include a recent medical report); and the amount of attorney fees being requested (typically, but not required to be 25%).  (California Benchbook, Civil Proceedings Before Trial, § 5.54(a).)

Before the hearing the court should make a preliminary determination of whether the proposed settlement and the method of payment appear reasonable in relation to the potential liability and the nature and extent of the injuries.  It is especially important to determine whether the minor’s condition is permanent, and whether it is stable or likely to worsen. (Ibid.)  The court should also make a preliminary determination of whether the costs, expense and attorney’s fees requested appear reasonable.  (Ibid.) 

Petitioners’ counsel, Rachel Fishenfeld (“Fishenfeld”) attests that her firm has represented each of the plaintiffs in this action and dedicated a “minimum of 25 hours” to reaching a settlement. (Fishenfeld Decl. ¶ 9.) According to Fishenfeld, the matter “required extensive investigation, discovery, and negotiation with all parties involved, including a continuing attempt to educate the parties of exactly what happened and why a settlement was appropriate.” (Fishenfeld Decl. ¶7.) The proposed order approving each petition to confirm minor’s compromise provides for the funds to be deposited or delivered to the parents of the minor, on the terms and under the conditions specified in Probate Code §§ 3401-3402.

The court finds that the settlement and total distribution to each minor is reasonable.

Fees and Costs

The amount of fees to be awarded is within the sound discretion of the court.  (Padilla v. McClellan (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 1100, 1107.)  In determining a reasonable attorney’s fee, the court may consider the following nonexclusive factors: (1) The fact that a minor or person with a disability is involved and the circumstances of that minor or person with a disability; (2) The amount of the fee in proportion to the value of the services performed; (3) The novelty and difficulty of the questions involved and the skill required to perform the legal services properly; (4) The amount involved and the results obtained; (5) The time limitations or constraints imposed by the representative of the minor or person with a disability or by the circumstances; (6) The nature and length of the professional relationship between the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability; (7) The experience, reputation, and ability of the attorney or attorneys performing the legal services; (8) The time and labor required; (9) The informed consent of the representative of the minor or person with a disability to the fee; (10) The relative sophistication of the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability; (11) The likelihood, if apparent to the representative of the minor or person with a disability when the representation agreement was made, that the attorney’s acceptance of the particular employment would preclude other employment; (12) Whether the fee is fixed, hourly, or contingent; (13) If the fee is contingent: (A) The risk of loss borne by the attorney; (B) The amount of costs advanced by the attorney; and (C) The delay in payment of fees and reimbursement of costs paid by the attorney; (14) Statutory requirements for representation agreements applicable to particular cases or claims.  (Rules of Court, rule 7.955(b).)

Fishenfeld attests that between $391.89 and $511.49 would be deducted for costs from each minor and $1,250.00 in fees in the event of any recovery on behalf of Plaintiffs. (Fishenfeld Decl. ¶¶ 4,11.) Fishenfeld also attaches to each petition copies of her retainer agreement signed by Plaintiffs, showing Plaintiffs agreed to attorney fees of 33 1/3% fees after the suit was filed.

The court finds that the fees and costs requested are reasonable.

Conclusion

Plaintiffs’ Petitions to Approve Compromise are GRANTED. Plaintiffs are to provide notice.