Judge: Gregory Keosian, Case: 22STCV04342, Date: 2022-09-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV04342    Hearing Date: September 28, 2022    Dept: 61

Plaintiff Javier Garcia’s Petitions to Approve Compromises for Minor Claimants Emily Garcia and Natalie Garcia are GRANTED.

I.                PETITION FOR MINOR’S COMPROMISE

Minors or people without legal capacity to make decisions must appear in court by a guardian, conservator of the estate, or guardian ad litem. (Code Civ. Proc. § 372, subd. (a)(1).) Such person appearing in court on behalf of the minor or person without capacity has the power to compromise the claims of the represented person, “with the approval of the court.” (Ibid.) The requirement of court approval exists “to protect the best interests of the minor.” (Pearson v. Superior Court (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 1333, 1338.)

“A petition for court approval of a compromise of, or a covenant not to sue or enforce judgment on, a minor's disputed claim; a compromise or settlement of a pending action or proceeding to which a minor or person with a disability is a party; or the disposition of the proceeds of a judgment for a minor or person with a disability under Probate Code sections 3500 and 3600-3613 or Code of Civil Procedure section 372 must be verified by the petitioner and must contain a full disclosure of all information that has any bearing on the reasonableness of the compromise, covenant, settlement, or disposition.” (CRC Rule 7.950.)

If an attorney assisted in the preparation of the petition, the petition must disclose: “(1) The name, state bar number, law firm, if any, and business address of the attorney; (2) Whether the attorney became involved with the petition, directly or indirectly, at the instance of any party against whom the claim is asserted or of any party's insurance carrier; (3) Whether the attorney represents or is employed by any other party or any insurance carrier involved in the matter; (4) Whether the attorney has received any attorney's fees or other compensation for services provided in connection with the claim giving rise to the petition or with the preparation of the petition, and, if so, the amounts and the identity of the person who paid the fees or other compensation; (5) If the attorney has not received any attorney's fees or other compensation for services provided in connection with the claim giving rise to the petition or with the preparation of the petition, whether the attorney expects to receive any fees or other compensation for these services, and, if so, the amounts and the identity of the person who is expected to pay the fees or other compensation; and (6) The terms of any agreement between the petitioner and the attorney.” (CRC Rule 7.951.)

The petitioner and claimant must attend the hearing on the petition unless the court for good cause orders otherwise. (CRC Rule 7.952, subd. (a).)

In all cases under Code of Civil Procedure section 372 or Probate Code sections 3600-3601, unless the court has approved the fee agreement in advance, the court must use a reasonable fee standard when approving and allowing the amount of attorney's fees payable from money or property paid or to be paid for the benefit of a minor or a person with a disability.

The court must give consideration to the terms of any representation agreement made between the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability and must evaluate the agreement based on the facts and circumstances existing at the time the agreement was made, except where the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability contemplated that the attorney's fee would be affected by later events.

(CRC Rule 7.955, subd. (a)(1)–(2).)

The settlement that Plaintiff Javier Garcia wishes to have approved for minor claimants Emily Garcia and Natalie Garcia is as follows. Defendant is to pay an amount equal to her insurance policy limits of $100,000.00. (Petition Att. 11b.) From this amount, Javier Garcia and Laura Garcia are each to receive $42,500.00, while minor plaintiffs Emily Garcia and Natalie Garcia are each to receive $5,000.00, as is Daniel Garcia, an adult son of Javier and Laura Vargas Gomez. (Ibid.) The parents are to receive a larger portion of the settlement because they suffered a grater proportion of damages and paid for rent, replacement of property losses, and repairs. (Petition Att. 11b.)

No attorney fees are to be deducted from claimant’s share of the proceeds (Petition at p. 6.) And the funds are to be given to claimants’ parent Javier Garcia to be held in trust for claimants under Probate Code §§ 3401 and 3402. Javier Garcia has provided a declaration stating, as required under Probate Code § 3401, that the total estate of the minor does not exceed $5,000.00. (Petition Att. 18b.)

The settlements presented here are reasonable. The minor claimants are to receive a substantial monetary recovery, unburdened by attorney fees. Although their recovery is less than that of their parents, this disparity is justified by the fact that the parent plaintiffs here sustained greater damages.

The petitions are therefore GRANTED.