Judge: Lynne M. Hobbs, Case: 22STCV26569, Date: 2023-10-17 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV26569    Hearing Date: November 8, 2023    Dept: 30

EDUARDO GONZALEZ vs MELANNIE CASTELLON-ESCOBAR, et al.

Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement

TENTATIVE

The motion for determination of good faith settlement is GRANTED.  The settlement between Plaintiff and Defendant Castellon-Escobar is a good faith settlement pursuant to CCP section 877.6. All claims against Castellon-Escobar for equitable comparative contribution, or partial or comparative indemnity, based on comparative negligence or comparative fault, are barred pursuant to CCP section 877.6(c). Moving party to give notice.

Discussion

Defendant Castellon-Escobar moves for a court order finding that the settlement entered into between Plaintiff and Defendant constitutes a good faith settlement and bars any past, present and future cross-complaints or claims for indemnity and/or contribution against it. No parties have opposed this motion.

An unopposed motion for determination of good faith settlement need not contain a full and complete discussion of the Tech-Bilt factors by declaration or affidavit; rather, a bare bones motion setting forth the grounds of good faith and a declaration containing a brief background of the case is sufficient. (City of Grant Terrance v. Superior Court (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 1251, 1261.)

Here, defense counsel states that Escobar alleges that on July 11, 2022 she was travelling Eastbound on the I-10 Freeway when Perry made an unsafe lane change into and in front of her lane, causing her to come into contact with Perry’s vehicle, which in turn caused a collision between Perry and Gonzalez’s vehicle. (Kahen Decl., ¶ 5.) Escobar, and her insurance carrier, have agreed to tender policy limits of $25,000 to Gonzalez even though liability is disputed and she contests the nature of the incident and the extent of Plaintiff’s injuries and damages. (Id., ¶ 9; Exh. 7.) Escobar does not have any assets and Escobar’s insurance carrier, Progressive Insurance, has agreed to pay policy limits on behalf of its insolvent insured. (Id., ¶ 10; Exh. 6; Escobar Decl., ¶¶ 3-6, 8.)

The Court finds Defendant has presented sufficient information demonstrating the settlement was made in good faith. Defendant is thus entitled to a court order finding the settlement was made in good faith.