Judge Katherine Chilton, Case 22STLC06957 2023-03-21 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Katherine Chilton, Case: 22STLC06957, Date: 2023-03-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STLC06957 Hearing Date: March 21, 2023 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: PETITION FOR MINOR’S COMPROMISE

MOVING PARTY: Petitioner Bianca Pacheco on behalf of minor Claimant Joaquin Duenas

RESP. PARTY: None

PETITION TO APPROVE MINOR’S COMPROMISE OF DISPUTED CLAIM

(CCP § 372, CRC, rule 7.950.5)

TENTATIVE RULING:

The hearing on the Petition for Approval of Minor’s Compromise filed on behalf of minor Claimant Joaquin Duenas is CONTINUED to APRIL 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. Petitioner is ordered to file supplemental papers addressing the issues discussed herein at least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) NOT OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) NOT OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) NOT OK

OPPOSITION: None filed as of March 15, 2023. [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of March 15, 2023. [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

I. Background

On October 19, 2022, Minor Joaquin Duenas (“Claimant”) filed an action against Defendant Beverly Villaluz (“Defendant”) arising out of an alleged motor vehicle accident on November 19, 2021. Bianca Pachecho was appointed Claimant’s guardian ad litem on October 31, 2022.

On November 15, 2022, Claimant, through his guardian ad litem, filed the instant Petition to Approve Minor’s Compromise of Disputed Claim (“Petition”).

On February 21, 2023, the Court noted several deficiencies in the Petition and continued the hearing to allow Petitioner additional time to correct these deficiencies. (2-21-23 Minute Order.)

On March 1, 2023, Petitioner filed additional papers.

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 section 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

The Petition sets out the following information:

Minor – Joaquin Duenas, 3 years old

Guardian Ad Litem – Bianca Pacheco

Defendants – Beverly Villaluz

Settlement: $7,000.00

Attorney’s Fees: $1,750.00

Litigation Costs: $581.74

Medical Bills: $918.00

TOTAL TO BE PAID TO MINOR: $3,750.26

General Requirements

· Petition on Form MC-350? YES

· Proposed Order on Form MC-351? YES

· Proof of service on other parties? Petitioner has served Mercury Insurance, but

there is no indication that Defendant Beverly Villaluz was served with the Petition.

Type of injury, medical expenses

Minor Claimant Duenas suffered “bruising on his chest and back pain.” (Pet. ¶ 6.) Claimant received “ambulance and emergency room treatment” but has “received no further treatment.” (Pet. ¶ 7.)

· Medical records documenting injuries and treatment? Yes. (Pet. pp. 11-45 – Attach. 8.)

· Negotiated reduction in medical liens? None. (Pet. ¶ 12a(3).)

· Injuries completely healed? Yes, Claimant “has recovered completely from the effects of the injuries described in item 6, and there are no permanent injuries.” (Ibid. at ¶ 8.) Petitioner has attached medical records from minor Claimant’s hospital visit on the date of the accident indicating the types of injuries Claimant has suffered and states that no further treatment has been received. (Pet. pp. 11-45, Pet. ¶ 7.)

Handling of Funds

How are settlement funds to be disposed of? “There is no guardianship or conservatorship of the estate of the claimant. Petitioner requests…$3,750.26 be deposited in insured accounts in one or more financial institutions in this state, subject to withdrawal only on authorization of the court. The name, branch, and address of each depository are specified in Attachment 18b(2).” (Pet. ¶ 18b(2); MC-355.) Petitioner has filed Attachment 18b(2) with information about the account where the funds will be deposited.

Attorneys’ Fees and Litigation Costs

· Attorneys’ fees requested? Yes, 25% of total settlement. (Pet. ¶ 13a; Pet. p. 54: Attach. 13a – Wabby Decl.)

· If yes, attorney declaration including factors under CRC 7.955(b)? Yes. (Pet. p. 54: Attach. 13a – Wabby Decl.)

· Copy of retainer agreement? Yes. (Pet. p. 55-56: Attach. 17a.)

· Litigation costs requested? Yes. (Pet. ¶ 13b.)

o Itemized? Yes. (Pet. ¶ 13b.)

On February 21, 2023, the Court noted the following deficiencies in the Petition:

1. Forms MC-350, 351, and 355 erroneously list the address for the courthouse as Stanley Mosk Courthouse, 111 North Hills Street, Los Angeles, 90012. The hearing will be held at the Spring Street Courthouse.

2. Petitioner has not checked ¶ 1 on Form MC-350 indicating that she is the guardian ad litem for minor Claimant. Similarly, she has not checked “parent” and “guardian ad litem” on Proposed Order, Form MC-351 ¶ 2.

3. Petitioner has erroneously checked ¶ 3a on Form MC-350, indicating that the Claimant “is not the subject of a pending action or proceeding.”

4. Petitioner indicates that Minor Claimant’s injuries have completely healed; however, she has not submitted any evidence to support this contention. (Pet. ¶ 8.)

5. Petitioner indicates that $3,998 in medical expenses has been paid but does not provide further explanation of how this amount was paid. (Pet. ¶ 12a(2).)

6. Petitioner indicates that medical expenses in the amount of $918.00 will be paid to The Rawlings Company; however, there is no evidence to support this request. (Pet. ¶ 12b(5)(b)(i).)

7. Petitioner’s counsel’s declaration does not sufficiently address factors under CRC 7.955(b). (See Pet. p. 11, Attach. 13a - Wabby Decl.)

8. Attachment 18b(2) is missing and there is no information about the account where the settlement funds will be deposited.

9. Petitioner has not filed proof that Respondent has been served with the Petition and supporting documents.

On March 1, 2023, Petitioner filed additional papers. Although Petitioner has corrected many of the errors noted, Court finds that the Petition still contains the following deficiencies:

1. Petitioner has not indicated the type of private health insurance that has paid Petitioner’s medical bills on MC-350 ¶ 12b(2)(a)-(d).

2. Petitioner does not indicate the amount of medical bills paid by Medi-Cal on MC-350 ¶ 12b(4) or Attachment 12(4). (Pet. pp. 52-53.)

3. Petitioner has not filled out MC-350 ¶ 12b(5) with information about the medical services providers that will need to be paid.

4. Petitioner has not checked box MC-350 ¶ 18b.

5. Petitioner has served Mercury Insurance, but there is no indication that Defendant Beverly Villaluz was served with the Petition. (MC-350 pp. 60-61.)

Given these deficiencies, the Court CONTINUES the hearing on the Petition for Minor’s Compromise of Disputed Claim.

IV. Conclusion & Order

For these reasons,

Petitioner is ordered to give notice.