Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: BC618179, Date: 2022-10-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC618179    Hearing Date: October 20, 2022    Dept: 54

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

 

Armando Macias,

 

 

 

Plaintiff,

 

Case No.:

 

 

BC618179

 

vs.

 

 

Tentative Ruling

 

 

Steven Ipsen, et al.,

 

 

 

Defendants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hearing Date: October 20, 2022

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion to Determine Good Faith Settlement

Moving Party: Cross-Defendants Dieter Dammeier and Dammeier Law Firm

Responding Party: None

 

T/R:     CROSS-DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO FOR APPROVAL OF GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT IS GRANTED.

 

            CROSS-DEFENDANTS TO NOTICE.

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at¿SMCdept54@lacourt.org¿with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing.

           

The Court considers the moving papers. No opposition has been received.           

Any party to an action in which it is alleged that two or more parties are joint tortfeasors or co-obligors on a contract debt shall be entitled to a hearing on the issue of the good faith of a settlement between the plaintiff or other claimant and one or more alleged tortfeasors or co-obligors upon giving notice in the manner provided in Code of Civil Procedure, section 1005(b).  (CCP § 877.6(a)(1).)  A determination by the court that the settlement was made in good faith shall bar any other joint tortfeasor or co-obligor from any further claims against the settling tortfeasor or co-obligor for equitable comparative contribution, or partial or comparative indemnity, based on comparative negligence or comparative fault.  (CCP § 877.6 (c).)  The party contesting the settlement bears the burden of proving that the settlement is in bad faith.  (CCP § 877.6 (d).) 

 

            Cross-Defendants apply for approval of their good faith settlement with Plaintiff. The parties engaged in extensive settlement negotiations and Cross-Defendants agreed to settle with Plaintiff Macias and the Plaintiff in a related case, Bruce Nance, for their entire insurance policy limits of $250,000.00. $225,000.00 is allocated to Macias. Cross-Defendants admit no fault. There is no challenge the settlement. The Court finds that the settlement is in good faith.

            The application is GRANTED.