Judge: Glenn R. Salter, Case: 22-1244685, Date: 2023-08-03 Tentative Ruling

Defendant William W. Green settled with the plaintiff for $55,000.  He filed this motion for a determination that his settlement was in good faith.

Defendants Douglas Landscape, Inc., and Niguel Ranch Homeowners Association oppose the motion.

The facts are straight forward and can be stated as follows:  A tree branch fell on the plaintiff as she was walking in a residential area.  Although Green tells the court the tree was on property adjacent to his, it appears the tree was on his property.  The homeowner’s association hired Douglas Landscape to trim the tree.  But Douglas’s employees did not cordon off the area as required, and a branch fell on the plaintiff injuring her.  Green was not there when the incident occurred.

The defendants submit evidence that the plaintiff is claiming around $3 million in damages and her medical expenses alone at this point total over $558,000.  In their mind, a settlement of only $55,000 is grossly disproportionate to a potential judgment.

Even assuming the truth of the defendants’ assertions, they have not met their burden to demonstrate that the settlement lacks good faith.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 877.6, subd. (d) [“party asserting the lack of good faith shall have the burden of proof on that issue”].)

The mere fact Green owned the tree, without more, is unlikely to be sufficient for a trier of fact to find Green liable for negligence or premises liability.  No one appears to dispute that it was Douglas Landscape employees that cut the tree branch or that it was the Niguel Ranch Homeowners Association that hired them.  Further, defendants do not appear to contend that Green had any involvement with the tree trimming other than as an owner of the tree.

The settlement amount of $55,000 represents nearly two percent of the $3 million alleged in plaintiff’s Statement of Damages.  It is also around six percent of the $1 million plaintiff asserts she advised the parties in writing that she was willing to settle for.

A defendant settlor should pay less in settlement that he would if he were found liable after trial.

Given all the facts, the court finds the objectors have not met their burden to demonstrate that the settlement amount is grossly disproportionate.  The Tech-Bilt factors have been met.  (Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & Associates (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488.)

The motion for good faith determination is GRANTED.  The moving party shall give notice.