Judge: Katherine Chilton, Case: 21STLC08736, Date: 2023-05-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STLC08736     Hearing Date: May 16, 2023    Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS:      EXPEDITED PETITION FOR MINOR’S COMPROMISE

MOVING PARTY:   Petitioner Jorge Cabrera, on behalf of minor Claimant Bianca Cabrera

RESP. PARTY:         None

EXPEDITED PETITION FOR APPROVAL OF

MINOR’S COMPROMISE OF A DISPUTED CLAIM

(CCP § 372, CRC, rules 7.950, 7.950.5)

TENTATIVE RULING:

The Petition filed on behalf of minor Claimant Bianca Cabrera is GRANTED.

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 May 14, 2023.               [   ] Late                      [X] None

REPLY:                     None filed as of May 14, 2023.               [   ] Late                      [X] None

ANALYSIS:

I.                Background

            On December 10, 2021, Plaintiffs Maria Espino (“Espino”) and Jorge Cabrera, on behalf of minor Bianca Cabrera, (collectively “Plaintiffs”), filed an action against Defendant Onofre Roman (“Roman” or “Defendant”) for motor vehicle and general negligence arising out of an alleged automobile accident that took place on January 5, 2020.  Jorge Cabrera (“Jorge”) was appointed guardian ad litem for minor Plaintiff Bianca Cabrera on December 14, 2021.  (12-14-21 Application and Order.)

            On July 27, 2022, Plaintiffs filed the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) and added minor Oscar Cabrera (“Oscar”) as a minor Plaintiff.  On August 17, 2022, Jorge Cabrera was appointed guardian ad litem for minor Oscar.  (8-17-22 Application and Order.)

            On September 26, 2022, Jorge Cabrera (“Petitioner”) filed the instant Expedited Petitions for Minor’s Compromise on behalf of minor Claimants Bianca Cabrera and Oscar Cabrera.

On December 2, 2022, the Court noted several deficiencies in the Expedited Petitions and set a hearing on the Petitions for January 5, 2023. (12-2-22 Minute Order.)  On December 28, 2022, at the request of Petitioner’s counsel, the Court continued the hearing to February 15, 2023. (12-28-22 Minute Order.)

            On February 15, 2023, the Court noted that the Petitions still contained some deficiencies and continued the hearing to March 15, 2023.  (2-15-23 Minute Order.)

On February 17, 2023, Petitioner filed Second Amended Petitions on behalf of minor Claimants Bianca and Oscar Cabrera.

On March 15, 2023, the Court granted the Petition filed on behalf of minor Claimant Oscar Cabrera.  (3-15-23 Minute Order.)  However, the Court continued the hearing on the Petition filed on behalf of minor Claimant Bianca Cabrera to allow Petitioner an opportunity to correct any final deficiencies.  (Ibid.)

On March 23, 2023, Petitioner filed the Third Amended Petition and supporting papers on behalf of minor Claimant Bianca.

            No opposition has been filed.

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 & Conclusion

Under California Rules of Court, rule 7.950.5, an expedited petition for minor’s compromise without a scheduled hearing is permitted as long as Petitioner uses the required Judicial Council forms and meets certain conditions.  The conditions are:

(1) Petitioner is represented by an attorney authorized to practice in the courts of this state;

(2) The claim is not for wrongful death;

(3) Settlement proceeds will not be placed in a trust;

(4) There are no unresolved liens to be satisfied from the proceeds of the compromise;

(5) Petitioner's attorney did not become involved at the request of Defendant or insurance carrier connected with the Petition;

(6) Petitioner's attorney is not employed by nor associated with a Defendant or insurance carrier in connection with the Petition;

(7) If an action has been filed on the claim, (A) all Defendants have appeared and are participating in the compromise OR (B) the Court has determined the settlement to be in good faith.

(8) The settlement, exclusive of interests and costs, is $50,000 or less OR (A) the amount payable is the insurance policy limits AND (B) all proposed contributing parties would be substantially unable to use assets other than the insurance policy limits.

(9) The court does not otherwise order.

On March 15, 2023, the Court reviewed the Second Amended Petition filed on behalf of minor Claimant Bianca Cabrera and found that Petitioner has corrected nearly all deficiencies previously noted in the Petition.  (3-15-23 Minute Order.)  The only remaining issue was that Petitioner’s responses regarding minor Claimant’s injuries were still inconsistent.  (Ibid.)

In response to Question 9, 2-17-23 MC-350 EX ¶ 9b, Petitioner indicated that minor Bianca “has not recovered completely from the effects of the injuries described in item 7, and the following injuries from which the claimant has not recovered are temporary.”  (Ibid.)  However, in Attachment 9b, Petitioner explained that “counsel spoke to the guardian ad litem and parent on 1/11/23 where it was confirmed that no further treatment has been received.  For clarification, the client is pain free and fully recovered from her sustained injuries.”  (Ibid.; 2-17-23 Pet. p. 44.)  Moreover, the medical records attached to the Petition indicated that minor “would need some future treatment for flare ups” including “conservative treatment in the future for a period of five years.”  (Ibid.; 2-17-23 MC-350EX pp. 36-38.)

            On March 23, 2023, Petitioner filed a Third Amended Petition and supporting papers.  The amended Petition indicates that “[t]he claimant has recovered completely from the effects of the injuries described in item 7, and there are no permanent injuries.”  (3-23-23 MC-350 EX ¶ 9b.)  Petitioner has attached the results of an orthopedic examination conducted on March 16, 2023, by Skyline Health Group, which conclude that “[t]his patient will not require any further medical attention.”  (3-23-23 MC-350 EX pp. 11, 44-46.)

            The Court finds that Petitioner has corrected all deficiencies in the Petition.

            Accordingly, the Petition filed on behalf of minor Claimant Bianca Cabrera is GRANTED.