Judge: Latrice A. G. Byrdsong, Case: 19STLC07446, Date: 2023-09-28 Tentative Ruling
If you desire to submit on the tentative ruling, you may do so by e-mailing Dept. 25 at the Spring Street Courthouse up until the morning of the motion hearing. The e-mail address is SSCdept25@lacourt.org. The heading on your e-mail should contain the case name, number, hearing date, and that you submit. The message should indicate your name, contact information, and the party you represent. Please note, the above e-mail address is to inform the court of your submission on the tentative ruling. All other inquiries will not receive a response.
Due to overcrowding concerns of COVID-19, all parties shall make every effort to schedule a remote appearance via LACourtConnect (https://my.lacourt.org/laccwelcome) for their next hearing. The parties shall register with LACourtConnect at least 2 hours prior to their scheduled hearing time. **Please note we no longer use CourtCall**
Case Number: 19STLC07446 Hearing Date: September 28, 2023 Dept: 25
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Rogers
19STLC07446
ANALYSIS:
I. Background
Subrogation action. Plaintiff’s insured was injured in an auto v. auto accident with Defendant William Rogers that resulted in damages to insured in the amount of $17,542.47.
Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a settlement agreement and notice of settlement was filed on November 8, 2021. A stipulation and order for dismissal of the action with retention of jurisdiction per CCP §664.6 was entered on May 18, 2022.
Complaint filed on 8/12/19
Subrogation
II. Legal Standard
“If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside the presence of the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.” (CCP §664.6.)
“Section 664.6 was enacted to provide a summary procedure for specifically enforcing a settlement contract without the need for a new lawsuit.” (Weddington Productions, Inc. v. Flick (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 793, 809.) “The statute recognizes that a settlement may be summarily enforced in either of two situations: where the settlement was made orally before the trial court or where it was made in writing outside the presence of the court.” (Elyaoudayan v. Hoffman (2003) 104 Cal.App.4th 1421, 1428.) Disputes regarding the terms of the settlement (or other disputed facts) may be adjudicated on a CCP § 664.6 motion, on the basis of declarations or other evidence. (Malouf Bros. v. Dixon (1991) 230 Cal.App.3d 280, 284.)
Once an action is dismissed, the court loses jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of the suit. (Wackeen, supra, 97 Cal.App.4th at 437. However, pursuant to CCP §664.6, “[i]f requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.” Thus, a court may retain jurisdiction under CCP 664.6, notwithstanding dismissal, but only if a proper request for retention of jurisdiction is made by the parties. (Id. at 439-440 (unless parties presented trial court with a proper request to retain jurisdiction for purposes of section 664.6 motions, trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction over action to enforce settlement post-dismissal).)
III. Discussion
Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a settlement agreement on May 4, 2022. (Reese Dec., ¶2, Ex. A.) The Court properly retained jursidction pursuant to CCP §664.6 in the Stipulation and Order of Dismissal entered on May 18, 2022. (Id. at ¶3.)
Defendant was required to pay $9000 in full settlement of the action as follows: an initial payment of $5000 by December 20, 2021; then beginning in February 2022, monthly payment sof $50 until payment in full of the $9000 settlement. (Id. at ¶2, Ex. A, ¶2.) The initial payment of $5000 was made and $200 worth of monthly payments thereafter. (Id. at ¶¶4 and 5.) Defendant then default and Plaintiff mailed Defendant notice of default on August 2, 2023, informing him of the 14- day period to cure the default. (Id. at ¶7.) No payment was made. (Id.)
Plaintiff establishes Defendant’s default on the settlement agreement and an outstanding balance of $3800, plus costs in the amount of $509.50, for a total of $4,309. (Id. at ¶8.). Plaintiff’s motion to vacate dismissal and entry of judgment pursuant to CCP §664.6 is granted.
IV. Conclusion & Order
Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate Dismissal and Entry of Judgment pursuant to CCP §664.6 is GRANTED. Judgment is entered against Defendant William Roger in the principal amount of $3800 plus costs in the amount of $509.50.
Moving party is ordered to give notice.