Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 19STCV27222, Date: 2023-08-15 Tentative Ruling

DEPARTMENT 56 JUDGE HOLLY J. FUJIE, LAW AND MOTION RULINGS. The court makes every effort to post tentative rulings by 5.00 pm of the court day before the hearing. The tentative ruling will not become the final ruling until the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(a)(2)], and are also available in the courtroom on the day of the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(b)]. If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance, all counsel must agree and choose which counsel will give notice. That counsel must 1) call Dept 56 by 8:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing (213/633-0656) and state that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling, and 2) serve notice of the ruling on all parties. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary and all parties should appear at the hearing in person or by Court Call. Court reporters are not provided, and parties who want a record of motions and other proceedings must hire a privately retained certified court reporter.

Case Number: 19STCV27222    Hearing Date: August 15, 2023    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff

The Court has considered the moving papers.  No opposition papers were filed.  Any opposition papers were required to have been filed and served at least nine court days before the hearing under California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 1005, subdivision (b). 

BACKGROUND

            Plaintiff’s complaint (the “Complaint”) alleges: (1) fraudulent concealment; (2) fraud; (3) negligent misrepresentation; (4) breach of fiduciary duty; and (5) accounting. 

            On March 1, 2023, Plaintiff filed a stipulation (the “Stipulation”) providing that Plaintiff and Defendants Clarence Mah and Glenn Mah (collectively, the “Mah Defendants”) entered into a settlement agreement (the “Agreement”) and requesting that the Court retain jurisdiction over the case to enforce the Agreement under CCP section 664.6. 

On June 5, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion to enforce settlement (the “Motion”) on the grounds that the Mah Defendants have not complied with the terms of the Agreement.  The Motion also requests that the Court award Plaintiff attorney’s fees in connection with enforcing the Agreement.

DISCUSSION

Under CCP section 664.6, if parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside 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.  (CCP § 664.6, subd. (a).)  If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.  (Id.)

In support of the Motion, Plaintiff provides evidence of the Agreement.  (See Declaration of Michael E. Bubman (“Bubman Decl.”) ¶ 3, Exhibit 2.)[1]  The Agreement requires the Mah Defendants to assign the rights to a life insurance policy to Plaintiff and to take certain steps to effectuate the assignment, which the Mah Defendants had not done at the time of the Motion’s filing.  (See Bubman Decl. ¶¶ 4-5.) 

The Agreement contains a provision that:

“Should any Party hereto institute any action or proceeding to enforce any provision of this Agreement, or for damages by reason of any alleged breach of any provision of this Agreement, or for a declaration of such Party's rights or obligations hereunder, or for any other judicial remedy relating to this Agreement, the prevailing Party in such action or proceeding shall recover from the losing Party its reasonable attorney's fees, costs and expenses.”  (Bubman Decl., Exhibit 2 at ¶ 22.)

Plaintiff requests $6,545 in connection with the Motion.  This amount represents: (1) eight hours preparing the moving papers; and (2) an anticipated three hours reviewing opposition papers, drafting reply papers, and attending the hearing at a rate of $595 per hour.  (Bubman Decl. ¶ 5.) 

As it is unopposed, the Court GRANTS the Motion.  (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.)  The Court also finds that Plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees in the total reasonable amount of $6,545, the amount requested.

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

         Dated this 15th day of August 2023