Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 19STCV08150, Date: 2023-09-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV08150    Hearing Date: September 12, 2023    Dept: 27

Tentative Ruling

Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 27

HEARING DATE:     September 12, 2023                           TRIAL DATE:  Vacated

CASE:                         Luisa Johnson, et al. v. South Pasadena Unified School District

CASE NO.:                 19STCV08150

PETITION TO APPROVE MINOR’S COMPROMISE

MOVING PARTY:               Petitioner Luisa Johnson

RESPONDING PARTY:      N/A

            Claimant, Syd Johnson, a minor, by and through his parent and Guardian Ad Litem, Luisa Johnson (“Petitioner”), has agreed to settle his claims against Defendant, South Pasadena Unified School District, in exchange for a lump sum of $60,000.  If approved, $20,000 will be used for attorney’s fees and $9,885 will be used for reimbursement of other expenses paid by Claimant’s attorney, leaving a balance of $30,115.09 for Claimant. 

            The Court reviewed the Petition on April 18, 2023 and found it could not be approved at that time for the following reasons:

·         Item 1 of the proposed order approving the Petition (MC-351) indicated that the matter was eligible for expedited approval.  However, Petitioner did not use Form MC-350EX.  

To the extent Claimant did not seek expedited approval, the Court noted the following deficiencies in the Petition: 

·         Item 3b set forth an incorrect case number. 

·         Item 9 was not completed. 

·         Item 11b subsections rather than Item 11a were selected incorrectly.

·         Item 13b lacked documentation to support reimbursement of $7,697.11 in deposition costs. 

·         The order of the amounts to be reimbursed as set forth in Items 14b(2) and b(3) should be changed. 

·         Item 15 sets forth the incorrect figure for the net balance of proceeds for the claimant. 

·         The Petition does not indicate in Item 18 where the settlement balance will be deposited. 

·         Regarding attorney’s fees, the Court found that the amount was fair and reasonable. However, the Declaration of I. Donald Weissman indicates that Claimant and his attorney have a contingency fee agreement but that agreement was not attached to the Petition. The agreement should be attached as Attachment 17a. 

·         Regarding the proposed order (MC-351), Petitioner indicated at Item 9c(2) that the balance of the settlement proceeds was to be deposited in a blocked account belonging to the minor.  However, as mentioned above, the Petition does not indicate how the settlement proceeds were to be disposed.  Nor had Petitioner included a proposed order to deposit the settlement proceeds into a blocked account (MC-355).  Additionally, Items 10 and 11 of the proposed order were not completed. 

On May 11 and May 12, 2023, Petitioner filed an amended Petition and proposed order.

            The amended Petition was reviewed on May 18, 2023.  The Court continued the Petition to allow Petitioner to address the following deficiencies:

·         Item 1 of the proposed order approving the Petition (MC-351) still indicates that the matter is eligible for expedited approval yet Petitioner has not used Form MC-350EX.

·         Item 9 of the proposed order indicates that the settlement proceeds are to be deposited to Wescon Credit Union in Pasadena, California.  However, that information does not appear in the Petition.  More importantly, Petitioner has not filed an Order to Deposit Funds in Blocked Account (MC-355).

            On July 18, 2023 and July 21, 2023, Petitioner filed another amended Petition and Forms MC-351 and MC-355.

Court approval is required for all settlements of a minor’s claim.  (Probate Code §§ 3500, 3600, et seq.; Code Civ. Proc. § 372.) 

            Petitioner has cured the defects noted in the Court’s previous order.  Accordingly, the Petition is GRANTED.     

            The Court sets an OSC re: Proof of Deposit for November 13, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 27 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 7.953, subd. (a).)  If an acknowledgement of receipt by the financial institution is filed before that date, no appearance will be required. 

Dated:   September 12, 2023                          ___________________________________

                                                                                    Kerry Bensinger

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

            Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.