Judge Kerry Bensinger, Case 21STCV17132 2023-02-21 Tentative Ruling

On May 6, 2021, plaintiffs Maria Sanchez Gutierrez, and Leslie Sandoval (“Leslie”) and Alonso Sandoval (“Alonso”), by and through their Guardian ad Litem, Maria Sanchez Gutierrez (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against defendant Abdelamir Elhagehassan (“Defendant”), and Does 1 to 20 for the wrongful death of Martin Sandoval (“Decedent”). Plaintiffs allege that Decedent was hired to paint Defendant’s auto dealership on April 17, 2020, when he fell from a ladder due to Defendant’s negligence.

On December 20, 2022, Plaintiffs filed the instant motion for leave to file a petition for approval of compromise of a minor’s claim under seal. The motion is unopposed.

The court may order that a record be filed under seal only if it expressly finds facts that establish: 1) there exists an overriding interest that overcomes the right of public access to the record; 2) the overriding interest supports sealing the record; 3) a substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed; 4) the proposed sealing is narrowly tailored; and 5) no less restrictive means exist to achieve the overriding interest. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 2.550, subd. (d).)

Here, Plaintiffs seek leave to file a petition for approval of a minor’s compromise because Plaintiffs represent that the parties have stipulated to a settlement agreement that requires approval of a minor’s compromise because Alonso is seventeen years old. Plaintiffs argue that their overriding interest will be prejudiced if the petition is not sealed because the petition and supporting documents will disclose the sum of money that Plaintiffs will receive in the settlement, information which predatory lenders and purveyors of abusive financial products can easily access from the Los Angeles Superior Court’s e-filing system. More to the point, Plaintiffs are Latino, and Leslie and Alonso are young people, which, Plaintiffs argue, are two groups that are aggressively targeted by payday lenders.

Plaintiffs also argue that there is no general public interest in disclosing the settlement amount, as the instant matter is strictly between Plaintiffs and Defendant and not, for example a class action or like matter. The private settlement amount, which contains a confidentiality clause, will be disclosed only because Alonso is a minor.

Finally, Plaintiffs argue sealing is appropriate because disclosure of the settlement sum will frustrate the public interest in encouraging settlement, especially in this case where there is no public interest in the settlement amount.

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion is narrowly tailored to seal the petition for approval of a minor’s compromise only and will facilitate settlement between the parties while serving Plaintiffs’ overriding interest in protecting their financial information from discovery. Therefore, Plaintiffs are entitled to an order granting Plaintiffs leave to file a petition for approval of a minor’s compromise under seal.

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.

Hon. Kerry Bensinger

Judge of the Superior Court