Judge Holly J. Fujie, Case 21STCV19501 2023-03-17 Tentative Ruling

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).

This action arises out of an employment relationship. On September 2, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement. The Notice of Settlement indicated that the settlement was conditional and that a request for dismissal would be filed by November 15, 2022. On December 13, 2022, after a non-appearance case review regarding dismissal after settlement, the Court noted that Plaintiff did not file a declaration as to why the case should not be dismissed and ordered that the Complaint be dismissed without prejudice. On January 17, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion to enforce settlement (the “Motion”), which asks the Court to enforce the settlement agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) entered into by Plaintiff and Defendants.

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.) 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 cannot purport to vest the trial court with retained jurisdiction after dismissal. (Hagan Engineering, Inc. v. Mills (2003) 115 Cal.App.4th 1004, 1008.) A party must apprise the court, within the settlement agreement or otherwise, of the desire of the parties that the court retain jurisdiction of the case. (Id.)

The Court finds that the Motion does not comply with the requirements of CCP section 664.6. The Court’s December 13, 2022 order of dismissal does not state that the Court retained jurisdiction pursuant to CCP section 664.6; nor was any evidence of the Settlement Agreement’s terms which provide for the Court’s retention of jurisdiction under CCP section 664.6 provided to the Court before the case was dismissed. Although Plaintiff may not currently enforce the Settlement Agreement under CCP section 664.6, Plaintiff may seek to have the dismissal vacated pursuant to CCP section 473, subdivision (b) and then attempt to file a motion to enforce the Settlement Agreement or file a separate lawsuit within the statute of limitations for breach of contract. The Court therefore DENIES the Motion.

In consideration of the current COVID-19 pandemic situation, the Court¿strongly¿encourages that appearances on all proceedings, including this one, be made by LACourtConnect if the parties do not submit on the tentative.¿¿If you instead intend to make an appearance in person at Court on this matter, you must send an email by 2 p.m. on the last Court day before the scheduled date of the hearing to¿SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org¿stating your intention to appear in person.¿ The Court will then inform you by close of business that day of the time your hearing will be held. The time set for the hearing may be at any time during that scheduled hearing day, or it may be necessary to schedule the hearing for another date if the Court is unable to accommodate all personal appearances set on that date.¿ This rule is necessary to ensure that adequate precautions can be taken for proper social distancing.

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.

Hon. Holly J. Fujie

Judge of the Superior Court