Judge: Matthew C. Braner, Case: 37-2020-00016380-CL-IC-CTL, Date: 2024-01-12 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - January 11, 2024

01/12/2024  09:00:00 AM  C-60 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Matthew C. Braner

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Limited  Insurance Coverage Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2020-00016380-CL-IC-CTL STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY VS. WILLIAM NEAL DAILY III [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company's unopposed motion to vacate dismissal, enforce settlement agreement, and enter judgment against Defendant William Neal Daily III is GRANTED.

'Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 provides a summary procedure to enforce a settlement agreement by entering judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. . . . The court retains jurisdiction to enforce a settlement under the statute even after a dismissal, but only if the parties requested such a retention of jurisdiction before the dismissal. Such a request must be made either in a writing signed by the parties or orally before the court. . . . If the court determines that the parties entered into an enforceable settlement, it should grant the motion and enter a formal judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement.' (Hines v. Lukes (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1174, 1182.) Here, the parties settled this case by stipulation (ROA #28) and the court ordered the case dismissed without prejudice while retaining jurisdiction pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. (ROA #29.) Defendant materially breached the agreement by failing to make monthly payments on his portion of the debt, and thereafter failing to make payment within 10 days of receiving a letter from Plaintiff or its counsel regarding the breach. (ROA #36, Mahfouz Dec., ¶¶ 8-10.) The parties agreed and stipulated that after such breach and upon declaration of Plaintiff or Plaintiff's counsel regarding such default, the court would set aside the dismissal without prejudice, resume jurisdiction over the matter, and enter a judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant in the amount of $7,185.18 (the settlement amount), less the amount paid by Defendant or his insurer towards the balance owed ($2,572.93), plus interest ($556.22), attorney fees ($1100), and costs ($377.38). (ROA #36, Mahfouz Dec., ¶¶ 8-12; ROA #28, ¶ 8.) Thus, Plaintiff's request for a $6,645.85 judgment is granted.

The parties entered into an enforceable settlement and stipulated for the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce it. Based on Defendant's default, the motion is granted, the July 25, 2022 dismissal is vacated, and judgment shall be entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant in the amount of $6,645.85.

The court will sign the proposed order and proposed judgment submitted by Plaintiff.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2976779  16