Judge: Mark C. Kim, Case: 20LBCV00214, Date: 2023-03-30 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 20LBCV00214 Hearing Date: March 30, 2023 Dept: S27
Plaintiff, Shane Manalang filed
this action against Defendants, Kamal Bijanpour, Kamal Bijanpour, Inc., and
Bijanpour Psychiatric Medical Group for breach of contract, common counts, and
fraud, arising out of Defendants’ alleged failure to pay Plaintiff for
physician assistant services. Plaintiff
sought damages in the amount of $1.5 million.
On 7/22/21, Plaintiff and
Defendants appeared at an FSC. The
parties entered into a settlement in open court. On the same day, the parties signed a
stipulation stating that the settlement is enforceable per CCP §664.6, and that
the Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement. The stipulation is attached as Exhibit 2 to
the moving papers. The parties
formalized their settlement agreement in writing, which is attached as Exhibit
1 to the moving papers. At ¶1(a) of the
agreement, Defendants agreed to pay a total of $628,562.00 to Plaintiff. Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal of
the entire action subsequent to the parties’ settlement.
a. Vacate Dismissal
The Court previously denied Plaintiff’s motion to enter
judgment, finding Plaintiff needed to first have the dismissal vacated. The Court noted:
Usually, the court loses subject matter jurisdiction when
an action is voluntarily dismissed (with or without prejudice). Thereafter, it
has no power to enforce a settlement agreement. Viejo Bancorp, Inc. v. Wood (1989) 217 Cal.App.3d
200, 206, 265 CR 620, 623. Where a
settlement agreement provides the court may retain jurisdiction to enforce the
settlement, but the dismissal fails to provide for retained jurisdiction, the plaintiff's
remedy is to move to vacate or modify the dismissal under CCP §473(b) for
“mistake, inadvertence or excusable neglect.” Basinger v. Rogers & Wells (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d
16, 21.
Plaintiff moves to vacate the dismissal, and the motion
is granted.
b. Enter Judgment
Plaintiff also seeks an order entering judgment in the
amount of $628,562.00. The Court
previously indicated that, if and when the dismissal was vacated, and in the
absence of opposition, it would grant such a motion. The motion is now granted.
Plaintiff filed a copy of a proposed judgment as an
exhibit. Plaintiff must lodge a separate
copy of the proposed judgment for review and signature, as the Court cannot
sign a judgment attached as an exhibit to the moving papers.
Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.
Parties who intend to submit
on this tentative must contact the clerk at 562-256-2227 indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by
the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If
the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting
on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be
placed off calendar. If a party
submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and
must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If any party does not
submit on the tentative, the party should make arrangements to appear remotely
at the hearing on this matter.