Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 20STCV33230, Date: 2024-04-25 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: 20STCV33230    Hearing Date: April 25, 2024    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

MOVING PARTY: Cross-Defendant Rodriguez Plastering   

RESPONDING PARTY: None 

The Court has considered the moving papers.  No opposition or reply papers have been filed as of April 23, 2024.  

BACKGROUND 

This action arises out of a dispute concerning a construction project.  On March 25, 2024, Cross-Defendant Rodriguez Plastering (“Moving Cross-Defendant”) filed the instant motion for determination of good faith settlement (the “Motion”).  The Motion is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6(a).  No opposition has been filed as of April 23, 2025.

DISCUSSION  

Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6, subdivision (a)(2) states as follows:

In the alternative, a settling party may give notice of settlement to all parties and to the court, together with an application for determination of good faith settlement and a proposed order. The application shall indicate the settling parties, and the basis, terms, and amount of the settlement. The notice, application, and proposed order shall be given by certified mail, return receipt requested, or by personal service. Proof of service shall be filed with the court. Within 25 days of the mailing of the notice, application, and proposed order, or within 20 days of personal service, a nonsettling party may file a notice of motion to contest the good faith of the settlement. If none of the nonsettling parties files a motion within 25 days of mailing of the notice, application, and proposed order, or within 20 days of personal service, the court may approve the settlement. The notice by a nonsettling party shall be given in the manner provided in subdivision (b) of Section 1005.  However, this paragraph shall not apply to settlements in which a confidentiality agreement has been entered into regarding the case or the terms of the settlement.

 The issue of the good faith of a settlement may be determined by the court based on affidavits served with the notice of hearing, and any counter affidavits filed in response, or the court may, in its discretion, receive other evidence at the hearing.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 877.6, subd. (b).)   A party asserting lack of good faith in settlement has the burden of proving lack of good faith.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 877.6, subd. (d).)  The objecting party may carry its burden by demonstrating that the settlement is so far “out of the ballpark” in relation to various factors, including: 

(1)  A rough approximation of plaintiff’s total recovery and the settlor’s proportionate liability;  

(2)  The amount paid in settlement;  

(3)  The allocation of settlement proceeds among plaintiffs;  

(4)  A recognition that a settlor should pay less in settlement than it would if it were found liable after a trial;  

(5)  The financial conditions and insurance policy limits of settling defendants; and  

(6)  The existence of collusion, fraud, or tortious conduct aimed to injure the interests of the non-settling defendants.  

(Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & Assocs. (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488, 499-500.)  When the motion for determination of good faith settlement is unopposed, then it may be granted without consideration of the Tech-Bilt factors and on the basis of setting forth the ground for good faith determination and a brief background of the case.  (See City of Grand Terrace v. Superior Court (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 1251, 1261 [“[W]e . . . conclude that only when the good faith nature of a settlement is disputed, it is incumbent upon the trial court to consider and weigh the Tech-Bilt factors.  That is to say, when no one objects, the barebones motion which sets forth the ground of good faith, accompanied by a declaration which sets forth a brief background of the case is sufficient.”)

Here, Moving Cross-Defendant seeks an order finding that its settlement with plaintiffs, Richard and Jennifer Bye (collectively the “Settling Parties”), was made in good faith, and for an order dismissing all pending complaints and cross-complaints against Moving Cross-Defendants, and barring any future claims by joint tortfeasors for equitable comparative contribution or partial comparative indemnity based upon comparative negligence or comparative fault arising out of this matter.  The terms of the settlement are that Moving Cross-Defendant agrees to jointly pay plaintiffs the total sum of $12,500 in exchange for a full settlement and release agreement.  The application should be granted based on the following.

The Notice of Motion and Motion and Declarations were served on March 25, 2024, via e-mail.  (3/25/24 Proof of Service.)  The application indicates the Settling Parties and the basis, terms and amount of the settlement.  (Motion pp. 4-6.)  The non-settling parties have not filed a motion challenging the application for good faith settlement determination.  Since the application is uncontested, it shall be granted so long as it sets forth the ground of good faith, accompanied by a declaration setting forth a brief background of the case.  Upon review, the Court finds both requirements have been met here.  (Motion pp. 4-6; O’Shea Decl.; Bye Decl.; Rodriguez Decl.)

Accordingly, the Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement filed by Cross-Defendant Rodriguez Plastering is GRANTED pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6(a). 

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 25th day of April 2024