Judge Katherine Chilton, Case 20STLC05098 2022-08-11 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Katherine Chilton, Case: 20STLC05098, Date: 2022-08-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STLC05098 Hearing Date: August 11, 2022 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO SET ASIDE/VACATE DISMISSAL AND ENTER JUDGMENT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

RESP. PARTY: None

MOTION TO SET ASIDE/VACATE DISMISSAL AND ENTER JUDGMENT

(CCP § 664.6)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff State Farm’s Motion to Set Aside Dismissal and Enter Judgment is GRANTED. Judgment of $5,060.00 will be entered against Defendant Eduardo Lopez.

SERVICE:

[ ] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) YES

[ ] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) YES

[ ] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) YES

OPPOSITION: None filed as of August 9, 2022 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of August 9, 2022 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

I. Background

On June 17, 2020, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendant Eduardo Lopez (“Defendant”) for subrogation, stemming from an automobile accident between Defendant and an individual insured by Plaintiff’s automobile insurance policy. (Complaint, p. 2.) Plaintiff compensated its Insured for claimed damages in the amount of $11,051.14 and filed the instant lawsuit against Defendant for allegedly causing the damages. (Ibid. pp. 2-3.) On August 7, 2020, Defendant filed an Answer denying all allegations in the Complaint.

On October 20, 2021, Plaintiff filed a Stipulation for Dismissal with Reservation to Vacate and Enter Judgment Upon Breach (“Stipulation”), signed by Plaintiff and Defendant. On October 21, 2021, the Court dismissed the entire case without prejudice pursuant to the Stipulation, retaining jurisdiction pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6. (10-21-21 Order for Dismissal.)

On June 23, 2022, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Vacate Dismissal and Enter Judgment (“Motion”) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6, alleging that Defendant breached the Stipulation Agreement. Counsel notified the Court that he would not appear at the hearing. (Mot.)

No opposition was filed.

II. Legal Standard & Discussion

Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6, provides a summary procedure that enables judges to enforce a settlement agreement by entering a judgment pursuant to the terms of the parties’ settlement. In particular the statute provides:

(a) If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside of 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. If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.

(b) For purposes of this section, a writing is signed by a party if it is signed by any of the following:

(1) The party.

(2) An attorney who represents the party.

(3) If the party is an insurer, an agent who is authorized in writing by the insurer to sign on the insurer's behalf.

CCP § 664.6(a)-(b) (emphasis added).

III. Discussion

A. Retention of Jurisdiction

“‘[V]oluntary dismissal of an action or special proceeding terminates the court’s jurisdiction over the matter.’ (Conservatorship of Martha P. (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 857, 867) [12 Cal.Rptr.3d 142.) ‘If requested by the parties,’ however, ‘the [trial] court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce [a] settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.’ (§ 664.6, italics added.)” (Mesa RHF Partners, L.P. v. City of Los Angeles (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 913, 917.) “‘Because of its summary nature, strict compliance with the requirements of section 664.6 is prerequisite to invoking the power of the court to impose a settlement agreement.’” (Ibid. (quoting Sully-Miller Contracting Co. v. Gledson/Cashman Construction, Inc. (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 30, 37).)

“A request for the trial court to retain jurisdiction under section 664.6 ‘must conform to the same three requirements which the Legislature and the courts have deemed necessary for section 664.6 enforcement of the settlement itself: the request 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.’” (Ibid. (quoting Wackeen v. Malis (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 429, 440).) “The ‘request must be express, not implied from other language, and it must be clear and unambiguous.’” (Ibid. (quoting Wackeen, supra, 97 Cal.App.4th at 440).)

Here, the parties signed a Stipulation for Dismissal with Reservation to Vacate and Enter Judgment Upon Breach (“Stipulation”) containing the parties’ agreement for the Court to retain jurisdiction pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §664.6 to enforce the terms of the stipulation and enter judgment in the event of default. (10-20-21 Stipulation ¶ 3.) Prior to the dismissal of this action, the Stipulation was signed by the parties and submitted to the Court. (Ibid.) On October 21, 2021, the Court dismissed the entire case pursuant to the Stipulation and expressly stated that it “shall retain jurisdiction pursuant to CCP § 664.6.” (10-21-21 Order.)

As the Stipulation complies with § 664.6 requirements, the Court has retained jurisdiction to enter judgment pursuant to the parties’ Stipulation in this action.

B. Entry of Judgment

Plaintiff and Defendant signed the Stipulation Agreement in October and August 2021, respectively. (10-20-21 Stipulation.) The Stipulation provides that Plaintiff and Defendant agreed to dismiss the action without prejudice on the premise that Defendant would pay Plaintiff a total of $9,450.86 (settlement amount) as follows: $4,450.86 to be paid by Defendant’s insurance carrier; then, starting July 15, 2021, monthly payments of $50.00 to be paid by Defendant due on the same day of each month until the settlement amount is paid in full. (Ibid at ¶ 2.) All parties signed the Stipulation. (Ibid. at ¶ 4.)

The Stipulation also provides that in the event Defendant fails to make timely payments, Plaintiff will mail a letter reminding Defendant to pay, and after 14 days of not receiving payment following the letter, Plaintiff will “be entitled to have any dismissal in this action set aside and judgment entered for the settlement amount, minus credit for payments received, plus any costs associated with entering the judgment not to exceed $500.” (Ibid. at ¶ 3.)

Plaintiff contends that Defendant’s insurance carrier made a one-time payment in the amount of $4,450.86. (Reese Decl. ¶ 4.) Defendant failed to make any payments. (Ibid at ¶ 5.) Plaintiff mailed a default letter regarding the missed payments to Defendant on or about May 5, 2022. (Ibid. at ¶ 6, Ex. C.) Defendant has failed to make any payments within 14 days. (Id. at ¶ 7.) Plaintiff seeks to have the dismissal set aside and to have judgment entered in the amount of $9,450.86, minus payment of $4,450.86, plus courts costs of $60.00, for a total of $5,060.00. (Ibid. at ¶¶ 7-8.)

The Court finds the Stipulation to be valid and enforceable under Code of Civil Proc. § 664.6. Plaintiff provides evidence that Defendant stopped making payments and did not respond to Plaintiff’s written notice of default.

Since a valid and signed stipulation agreement was breached and the Court retained jurisdiction to enter judgment upon breach, Plaintiff’s Motion to Set Aside Dismissal and Enter Judgment is GRANTED. Judgment in the amount of $5,060.00 will be entered against Defendant.

IV. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff State Farm’s Motion to Set Aside Dismissal and Enter Judgment is GRANTED. Judgment of $5,060.00 will be entered against Defendant Eduardo Lopez.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.