Judge: Latrice A. G. Byrdsong, Case: 21STLC06911, Date: 2023-11-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STLC06911    Hearing Date: December 11, 2023    Dept: 25

Hearing Date:                         Monday, December 11, 2023

Case Name:                             MERCURY INSURANCE CO. v. BENJAMIN GUTIERREZ.

Case No.:                                21STLC06911

Motion:                                   Motion to Enforce Settlement and Enter Judgement Pursuant to CCP § 664.6

Moving Party:                         Plaintiff, Mercury Insurance Co.

Responding Party:                   None

Notice:                                    OK

 

Tentative Ruling:                    Plaintiff Mercury Insurance Co.’s Motion to Enforce Settlement and Enter Judgment is GRANTED, and judgment is entered for Plaintiff and against Defendant Gutierrez for $21,819.64.

 

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 December 05, 2023              [ ] Late            [X] None

REPLY:                     None filed as of December 05, 2023              [ ] Late            [X] None

 

BACKGROUND

 

On September 23, 2021, Plaintiff Mercury Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) commenced this action against Defendants Benjamin Gutierrez (“Gutierrez”), and Edgar A. Talamante-Campos (“Talamante-Campos”) (collectively, “Defendants”) by filing a “Complaint by Subrogated Insurer Pursuant to Insurance Code section 11580.2 and for Property Damage” (the “Complaint”). The Complaint sought damages in the amount totaling $20,935.14.

 

On November 17, 2021, Plaintiff dismissed Defendant Talamante-Campos.

 

On March 8, 2022, the Court entered as an order the parties’ “Stipulation and Order Dismissing Entire Action with Prejudice with the Court Retaining Jurisdiction to Enforce Settlement Agreement Between the Parties Pursuant to C.C.P. 664.6.”

 

On July 5, 2023, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Enter Judgment Pursuant to Settlement Agreement Under CCP § 664.6.

 

On September 21, 2023, Plaintiff re-filed the instant motion.

 

On September 27, 2023, the Court continued the hearing for the motion to November 7, 2023.  

On November 07, 2023, the Court continued the hearing for the motion to December 11, 2023. That same day Plaintiff submitted supplemental briefing on the motion. No opposition to the motion has been filed.

 

MOVING PARTY POSITION

 

Plaintiff moves for judgment against Defendant Gutierrez pursuant to a written agreement the parties signed on January 24, 2022 (the “Settlement Agreement”). Plaintiff states it will accept a Court judgment of $20,435.14 (i.e., the original principal of $20,935.14 less $500 credit), contractual filing fees and costs of $449.50 ($370.00 plus $79.50), attorney’s fees of 875, and motion filing fees of $60.

 

OPPOSITION

 

            No opposition has been filed.

 

REPLY

 

            No reply has been filed.

 

ANALYSIS

 

I.          Legal Standard

Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 (“CCP section 664.6”) states: “If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside of 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.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 664.6, subd. (a) [emphasis added].) For purposes of the statute, “a writing is signed by a party if it is signed by any of the following [among other individuals]: (1) ¶ The party. (2) ¶ An attorney who represents the party.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 664.6, subd. (b) [emphasis added].)

 

“On a motion to enforce, the court must determine whether the settlement agreement is valid and binding. [Citation.] The court assesses whether the material terms of the settlement were reasonably well-defined and certain, and whether the parties expressly acknowledged that they understood and agreed to be bound by those terms. [In re Marriage of Assemi (1994) 7 Cal.4th 896, 911.]” (Estate of Jones (2022) 82 Cal.App.5th 948, 952.)

 

The court may interpret the terms and conditions of a settlement (Fiore v. Alvord (1985) 182 Cal.App.3d 561, 566), but the court may not create material terms of a settlement, as opposed to deciding what terms the parties themselves have previously agreed upon (Weddington Productions, Inc. v. Flick (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 793, 810).

 

II.        Discussion

Plaintiff and Gutierrez agreed to settle the matter for a principal sum of $20,935.14, with Gutierrez agreeing to pay $125, on the 25th day of each month, until the sum is paid in full. Gutierrez initially made four payments of $125 (i.e., $500), but has not made any payment since June 2022. (Thai Decl., ¶ 5.) Plaintiff gave Gutierrez notice of the default through numerous past-due letters. (Id., ¶ 5; Exhibit 3 – a copy of past due letters.) Accordingly, due to Gutierrez’s failure to comply with the Settlement Agreement, Plaintiff requested that a judgment of $21,840.91 be entered against Gutierrez. (11/07/23 Minute Order.)

In its prior ruling, the Court indicated it was prepared to enter a judgement of $21,819.64 and requested Plaintiff’s Counsel submit a supplemental declaration explaining the reason as to why the requested filing fee was more than the contractually agreed filing fee amount of $370.00. (Id.) Plaintiff’s Counsel has since provided a supplemental declaration indicating that it is prepared to accept a judgment of only $21,819.64. (Min Thai Supplemental Decl. ¶ 2.)

Therefore, the Court GRANTS the motion and enters judgment of $21,819.64 consisting of $20,435.14 (i.e., the original principal of $20,935.14 less $500 credit), contractual filing fees and costs of $449.50 ($370.00 plus $79.50), attorney’s fees of $875, and motion filing fees of $60.

III.       Conclusion

           

            Motion is GRANTED and judgment is entered for Plaintiff and against Defendant Gutierrez for $21,819.64. 


Counsel for the Moving Party is ordered to submit the proposed judgment, Immediately.


Moving party is ordered to give notice.