Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 23CHCV01534, Date: 2023-11-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23CHCV01534    Hearing Date: January 12, 2024    Dept: F47

Dept. F47

Date: 1/12/24

Case #23CHCV01534

MINOR’S COMPROMISE

Petition filed on 12/19/23. 

MINOR: Plaintiff Nathan J. Bravo

GAL: Mario Bravo-Palacios (parent)

DEFENDANTS: Helena Don Miner; Ivonne Miner; Richard Allen Veon; Rick Veon; Rubik Barseghyan; Hayk Bablumyan; Yossi Dayan; Karen Manukyan and Temptechs dba Temptechs, Inc.

RULING:   

This action arises out of a motor vehicle collision that occurred on 5/16/22.  Minor Plaintiff Nathan J. Bravo (Minor) was a passenger in a rear-ended vehicle driven by Plaintiff Mario Bravo-Palacios.  Minor suffered from pain to the neck, back, chest and both knees.  Minor underwent chiropractic care and had MRIs taken.  The petition indicates that the Minor has completely recovered from his injuries. 

On 5/25/23, Plaintiffs filed this action against Helena Don Miner; Ivonne Miner; Richard Allen Veon; Rick Veon; Rubik Barseghyan; Hayk Bablumyan; Yossi Dayan; Karen Manukyan and Temptechs dba Temptechs, Inc.  On 9/26/23, Helena Don Miner and Ivonne Miner answered the complaint.  On 10/2/23, Defendant Richard Allen Veon answered the complaint and filed a cross-complaint against the other named defendants.   

On 10/4/23, an expedited petition to approve minor’s compromise was filed seeking approval of the compromise of Minor’s claim as against Defendants Helena Don Miner and Ivonne Miner, only, for $6,500.00.  The proof of service attached to the expedited petition shows that it was served only on counsel for the settling defendants, Helena Don Miner and Ivonne Miner. 

Since Defendant Richard Allen Veon (the only other defendant who had appeared in the action at the time) was not participating in the compromise/settlement and this Court has not finally determined that the settling parties entered into the settlement in good faith, the petition did not qualify for expedited approval.  See CRC 7.950.5(a)(7)(A), (B).  Based on the expedited petition, it also was not clear that there are no unresolved disputes concerning liens to be satisfied from the proceeds of the compromise as is required for expedited approval.  See CRC 7.950.5(a)(4). 

Additionally, Attachment 18a in the expedited petition did not correspond to number 18.a. in the petition and the Attorney Fee Agreement should have been part of Attachment 14a.  There was also no Attachment 19b(2) as required.

Based on the foregoing, the Court set a hearing on the petition for 11/15/23 because it intended to deny same without prejudice.  (See 10/9/23 Minute Order); CRC 7.950(c)(3). 

In response to the Court’s 10/9/23 order, on 10/24/23, a new petition (not expedited) for approval of minor’s compromise (new petition) was filed and served.  On 11/15/23, the new petition was denied without prejudice due to defects with the service of the petition and defects in the petition itself.  (See 11/15/23 Minute Order).  On 11/15/23, the Court reserved 12/18/23 for the hearing on the new petition.  Id.  No petition was filed for the 12/18/23 hearing date.

On 12/5/23, Defendants Yossi Dayan and Temptechs dba Temptechs, Inc. answered the complaint and filed a cross-complaint against the other defendants. 

On 12/19/23, Plaintiffs filed and served by electronic mail the instant petition for the 1/12/24 hearing date. 

The proof of service for the instant petition is defective for several reasons.  First, electronic service of the petition on 12/19/23 for the 1/12/24 hearing date does not provide the requisite 16 court days plus two court days notice required for electronic service.  See CCP 1005(b); CCP 1010.69(a)(3)(B).  Second, as with the service of the petition for the 11/15/23 hearing,

the email address where counsel for Defendant/Cross-Complainant Richard Allen Veon was served (marshall.coyle@kemper.com) does not match the email address on record for his counsel (mcoyle@md-llp.com) in eCourt.  (See 11/15/23 Minute Order).  Third, the proof of service does not show service of the petition on counsel for Defendants Yossi Dayan and Temptechs dba Temptechs, Inc.

If counsel for all other parties appear and waive the defect in notice and/or Plaintiffs submit evidence of such waiver (i.e., declarations from counsel from the other parties waiving the defect), the petition will be granted.  If not, the hearing will be continued due to the defect in notice.