Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 20STCV31999, Date: 2023-08-28 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: 20STCV31999    Hearing Date: September 5, 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 two causes of action for breach of contract.

            On August 25, 2022, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement indicating that Plaintiff and Defendant had entered into a settlement agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) to resolve Plaintiff’s claims.  On November 23, 2022, the Court dismissed the Complaint because Plaintiff did not file a declaration that provided information as to why the case should not be dismissed.

On July 12, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion to enforce settlement (the “Motion”) on the grounds that Defendant has defaulted on the Settlement Agreement.  The Court vacated the dismissal on August 29, 2023.

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.)

Settlement language purporting to vest the trial court with retained jurisdiction after the dismissal is a nullity.  (Sayta v. Chu (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 960, 967.)  In order to ensure enforcement of a settlement agreement through a CCP section 664.6 motion, the parties are required to present the trial court with a proper request to retain jurisdiction.  (Id.)  The request for retention of 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.  (Id. at 966.)

In support of the Motion, Plaintiff provides evidence that Defendant has defaulted on payments owed pursuant to the Settlement Agreement.  (See Declaration of Timothy Carl Aires (“Aires Decl.”)  ¶ 4, Exhibit B.)  The Settlement Agreement contains a provision that permits Plaintiff to recover attorney’s fees incurred in seeking judgment.  (See Aires Decl., Exhibit A at 1.)  Plaintiff requests that the Court enter a judgment that reflects the terms of the Settlement Agreement and allow Plaintiff to recover $1,500 in attorney’s fees that were incurred in seeking enforcement of the Settlement Agreement.  (See Aires Decl. ¶ 5.)

As it is unopposed, the Court GRANTS the Motion.  (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.) 

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 5th day of September 2023