Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 23CHCV00115, Date: 2023-03-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23CHCV00115    Hearing Date: March 1, 2023    Dept: F47

Dept. F47

Date: 3/1/23

Case #23CHCV00115

MINOR’S COMPROMISE

Petition filed on 2/3/23.

MINOR: Selene Barajas

GAL: Miguel Angel Barajas (parent)

DEFENDANT: Claudia Gutierrez

SUMMARY OF ACTION: This action arises out of a motor vehicle accident wherein minor was a passenger in one of the vehicles along with her mother (driver), father, and grandmother.  Minor suffered neck, low back, right leg pain; right hip bruise and anxiety. 

SETTLEMENT: $6,210.00

Defendant Gutierrez’s insurance policy limits with State Farm were set forth in a declaration provided by her attorney (but not provided to the Court) which purportedly stated that the limits are as follows: $25,000.00 bodily injury limit per person/$50,000.00 bodily injury limit per accident.  Plaintiff Stephanie Barajas had no underinsured provision on her automobile policy. The policy limits of defendant's policy were obtained and apportioned between the claimant/minor and each other plaintiff or claimant named in the petition.  The apportionment was based on the severity of injuries sustained by each plaintiff. 

ATTORNEY FEES: $1,552.50

MEDICAL EXPENSES: $62,109.52 (total); $43,748.83 (paid); $59,879.52 (reduction); $2,070.00 (to be paid from settlement)

EXPENSES: $589.84

AMOUNT TO BE PAID TO MINOR: $1,997.66 to be deposited in an insured account

RULING: The petition is denied without prejudice.

First, it is not clear that this petition is properly before this Court.  This action was filed on 1/17/23 and never served on Defendant Claudia Gutierrez who has never appeared in this action.  The instant Petition For Approval of Compromise of the Claim of Minor Selene Barajas was filed approximately two and a half weeks after the action was filed.  As such, it appears that this action may have been filed for the sole purpose of having the compromise of the minor’s claim approved.  If this is the case, Plaintiffs’ counsel has not followed the proper procedure. 

If the claim of a minor is settled and there is no civil action pending, the settlement is to be approved by the probate court as provided in Probate Code sections 2505(b) and 3500.  See LASC, Local Rule 4.115(a)(1).

Additionally, there is no way for the Court to confirm whether Defendant has any objection to the petition as she has not appeared in the action through counsel or otherwise.  Minimally, a declaration from Defendant’s counsel must be filed to establish that Defendant is aware of the petition and has no objection thereto.

Further, the petition itself suffers from the following defects:

(1) Numbers 5-7 in the petition are not completed. 

(2) Attachment 8 to the petition is merely notes regarding what appears to be a routine check-up that took place on 9/6/22 as there is no reference to the accident or the minor’s alleged injuries.  The notes do say that the minor is cleared for sports and there are no restrictions for full activity.

(3) Number 10.b. regarding the terms of the settlement is not completed. 

(4) Under the circumstances, the signature of the claimant/minor is not necessary under number 21.