Judge Katherine Chilton, Case 21STLC02138 2022-10-10 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Katherine Chilton, Case: 21STLC02138, Date: 2022-10-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STLC02138 Hearing Date: October 10, 2022 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: PETITION FOR MINOR’S COMPROMISE

MOVING PARTY: Petitioner Peter Duc Tiennguyen, on behalf of minor Claimant Alicia Nguyen and minor Claimant Catherine Nguyen

RESP. PARTY: None

PETITION FOR APPROVAL OF MINOR’S COMPROMISE OF A DISPUTED CLAIM

(CCP § 372, CRC, rule 7.950)

TENTATIVE RULING:

The hearing on the Petition for Approval of Minor’s Compromise on behalf of minor Claimant Alicia Nguyen is CONTINUED to NOVEMBER 9, 2022 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25 at Spring Street Courthouse. Petitioner is ordered to file supplemental papers addressing the deficiencies noted herein at least 16 court days before the scheduled hearing. Failure to do so may result in the hearing being placed off calendar or denied.

The hearing on the Petition for Approval of Minor’s Compromise on behalf of minor Claimant Catherine Nguyen is CONTINUED to NOVEMBER 9, 2022 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25 at Spring Street Courthouse. Petitioner is ordered to file supplemental papers addressing the deficiencies noted herein at least 16 court days before the scheduled hearing. Failure to do so may result in the hearing being placed off calendar or denied.

SERVICE:

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

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

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

OPPOSITION: None filed as of October 5, 2022 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of October 5, 2022 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

I. Background

On March 15, 2021, Plaintiff Peter Duc Tiennguyen (“Tiennguyen”) and minor Plaintiffs Alicia Nguyen (“Alicia”), Conlan Nguyen (“Conlan”), and Catherine Nguyen (“Catherine”) filed an action against Defendant Scott Centurion (“Scott”) for motor vehicle and general negligence. Plaintiff Tiennguyen (“Petitioner”) was appointed as guardian ad litem for all three minor Plaintiffs on April 5, 2021.

The Court electronically received Plaintiff’s amendment to the Complaint, substituting Defendant Vivian S. Centurion (“Vivian”) for Doe 1 on April 15, 2021. Defendant Vivian was personally served, and Defendant Scott was served by substituted service with the Summons and Complaint on May 7, 2021. (5-25-21 Proofs of Service.)

On February 7 and 9, 2022, the Court found that the Petitions to Approve Compromise of a Disputed Claim filed by Petitioner on Behalf of Minor Claimants Alicia, Conlan, and Catherine, contained several errors and denied the Petitions without prejudice. (2-7-22 Minute Order; 2-9-22 Minute Order.) The Court also noted that Claimant Conlan was no longer a minor and did not need a petition for minor’s compromise to be filed on his behalf. (2-9-22 Minute Order.)

On July 19, 2022, Petitioner filed the instant Petitions to Approve Compromise of a Disputed Claim on Behalf of Minor Claimants Alicia Nguyen (“Petition Re: Alicia”) and Catherine Nguyen (“Petition Re: Catherine”). No opposition was filed to either Petition.

On September 12, 2022, on the date scheduled for trial, the Court placed the trial date off calendar and advanced the hearing for the Petition scheduled for October 4, 2022, to October 10, 2022. (9-12-22 Minute Order.)

II. Legal Standard

Court approval is required for all settlements of a minor’s claim. (Prob. Code §§ 3500, 3600, et seq.; CCP § 372.) “‘[W]ithout trial court approval of the proposed compromise of the ward’s claim, the settlement cannot be valid. [Citation.] [¶] Nor is the settlement binding [on the minor] until it is endorsed by the trial court.’” (Pearson v. Superior Court (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 1333, 1338.) A minor, like Claimant, “shall appear either by a guardian or conservator of the estate or by a guardian ad litem appointed by the court in which the action or proceeding is pending, or by a judge thereof, in each case.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 372(a)(1).) Alternatively, the petitioner may file a declaration demonstrating that he or she has a right to compromise the minor’s claim under Cal. Probate Code § 3500.

Regarding the substance of the Petition, to obtain court approval of the settlement of a minor’s claims, the petitioner must file a complete and “verified petition for approval of the settlement and must disclose ‘all information that has any bearing upon the reasonableness of the compromise.’ [Citations.]” (Barnes v. Western Heritage Ins. Co. (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 249, 256; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.950.) (Italics added.)

Under Probate Code § 3505, if a petition is unopposed, the Court must issue a decision on the petition at the conclusion of the hearing.

III. Discussion

A. Petition Re: Alicia

Minor – Alicia Nguyen, 15 years old

Guardian Ad Litem – Peter Duc Tiennguyen

Defendants – Scott A. Centurion, Vivian S. Centurion

Settlement: $8,350.00

Attorney’s Fees: $2,087.50

Litigation Costs: $335.00

Medical Bills: $2,000.00

TOTAL TO BE PAID TO MINOR: $3,927.50

General Requirements

· Petition on Form MC-350? YES

· Proposed Order on Form MC-351? NO

· Proof of service on other parties? YES

Type of injury, medical expenses

Minor Plaintiff Alicia Nguyen sustained neck, upper back, and shoulder injuries. (Pet. p. 2, ¶ 6.) She received the following treatment by a chiropractor: “Mechanical Traction, EMS, Chiropractic Manipulation, hot and cold packs and neuromuscular work.” (Ibid. at ¶ 7.) She has recovered completely and does not have any permanent injuries. (Ibid. at ¶ 8.)

· Medical records documenting injuries and treatment? Yes. (Pet., Attach. 8.)

· Negotiated reduction in medical liens? Yes. (Pet. p. 5, ¶ 12; Moghtader Decl. ¶ 3, Attach. 8.)

· Injuries completely healed? Yes, Minor Plaintiff has completely recovered and there are no permanent injuries. (Pet. p. 2, ¶ 8.)

Handling of Funds

How are settlement funds to be disposed of? “$3,927.50 be paid or delivered to a parent of the minor, without bond, on the terms and under the conditions specified in Probate Code sections 3401-3402. The name and address of the parent and the money or other property to be delivered are specified in Attachment 18(b)(5).” (Pet. p. 8, 18(b)(5); Tiennguyen Decl. ¶ 5; Ex. B.) Petitioner has not submitted Attachment 18(b)(5) or Exhibit B.

Attorneys’ Fees and Litigation Costs

· Attorneys’ fees requested? Yes, 25% of total settlement. (Moghtader Decl. ¶ 6.)

· If yes, attorney declaration including factors under CRC 7.955(b)? Declaration does not discuss any of the factors. (Petition, Moghtader Decl.)

· Copy of retainer agreement? Yes. (Attach. 17(a).)

· Litigation costs requested? Yes. (Moghtader Decl. ¶¶ 4-5, 7.)

o Itemized? Yes. (Pet. p. 5, ¶ 13.)

Having reviewed the instant Petition, the Court finds the following deficiencies.

1) Petitioner has failed to file Proposed Form, MC-351.

2) Petitioner states that he wishes to use the proceeds of the settlement to purchase a laptop for Claimant. (Tiennguyen Decl. ¶ 5; Ex. B.) However, he has failed to submit Attachment 18(b)(5) and Exhibit B, which support Petitioner’s argument for disposition of funds and provide the manner by which the money will be delivered. (Pet. p. 8 - ¶ 18(b)(5); Pet. p. 9 - ¶ 20; Tiennguyen Decl. ¶ 5; Ex. B.)

3) Petitioner responded that he “is a plaintiff in the same action with the claimant,” but failed to submit Attachment 11(b)(3) explaining how “the circumstances and the effect your claim and its disposition has on the proposed compromise of the claim or action described in this petition.” (Pet. p. 3, ¶ 11(b)(3).)

4) Counsel Moghtader’s Declaration does not discuss factors outlined by California Rules of Court, rule 7.955(b) to show that the request for attorney’s fees is reasonable.

For these reasons, the Court CONTINUES the hearing on the Petition for Minor’s Compromise submitted on behalf of Minor Claimant Alice Nguyen.

B. Petition Re: Catherine

Minor – Catherine Nguyen, 9 years old

Guardian Ad Litem – Peter Duc Tiennguyen

Defendants – Scott A. Centurion, Vivian S. Centurion

Settlement: $8,350.00

Attorney’s Fees: $2,087.50

Litigation Costs: $335.00

Medical Bills: $1,000.00

TOTAL TO BE PAID TO MINOR: $4,927.50

General Requirements

· Petition on Form MC-350? YES

· Proposed Order on Form MC-351? NO

· Proof of service on other parties? YES

Type of injury, medical expenses

Minor Plaintiff Catherine Nguyen sustained neck pain and stiffness, pain and stiffness of the thoracic region. (Pet. p. 2, ¶ 6.) She received the following treatment by a chiropractor: “Mechanical Traction, EMS, Chiropractic Manipulation, hot and cold packs and neuromuscular work.” (Ibid. at ¶ 7.) She has recovered completely and does not have any permanent injuries. (Ibid. at ¶ 8.)

· Medical records documenting injuries and treatment? Yes. (Pet., Attach. 8.)

· Negotiated reduction in medical liens? Yes. (Pet. p. 5, ¶ 12; Moghtader Decl. ¶ 3, Attach. 8.)

· Injuries completely healed? Yes, Minor Plaintiff has completely recovered and there are no permanent injuries. (Pet. p. 2, ¶ 8.)

Handling of Funds

How are settlement funds to be disposed of? “$4,927.50 be paid or delivered to a parent of the minor, without bond, on the terms and under the conditions specified in Probate Code sections 3401-3402. The name and address of the parent and the money or other property to be delivered are specified in Attachment 18(b)(5).” (Pet. p. 8, 18(b)(5); Tiennguyen Decl. ¶ 5; Ex. B.). Petitioner has not submitted Attachment 18(b)(5) or Exhibit B.

Attorneys’ Fees and Litigation Costs

· Attorneys’ fees requested? Yes, 25% of total settlement. (Moghtader Decl. ¶ 6.)

· If yes, attorney declaration including factors under CRC 7.955(b)? Declaration does not discuss any of the factors. (Petition, Moghtader Decl.)

· Copy of retainer agreement? Yes. (Attach. 17(a).)

· Litigation costs requested? Yes. (Moghtader Decl. ¶¶ 4-5, 7.)

o Itemized? Yes. (Pet. p. 5, ¶ 13.)

Having reviewed the instant Petition, the Court finds the following deficiencies.

1) Petitioner has failed to file Proposed Form, MC-351.

5) Counsel Moghtader’s Declaration does not discuss factors outlined by California Rules of Court, rule 7.955(b) to show that the request for attorney’s fees is reasonable.

For these reasons, the Court CONTINUES the hearing on the Petition for Minor’s Compromise submitted on behalf of Minor Claimant Catherine Nguyen.

IV. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons,

The hearing on the Petition for Approval of Minor’s Compromise on behalf of minor Claimant Catherine Nguyen is CONTINUED to to NOVEMBER 9, 2022 at 10:30 a.m in Department 25 at Spring Street Courthouse. Petitioner is ordered to file supplemental papers addressing the deficiencies noted herein at least 16 court days before the scheduled hearing. Failure to do so may result in the hearing being placed off calendar or denied.

Petitioner is ordered to give notice.