Judge: Michael P. Linfield, Case: 21STCV12900, Date: 2023-04-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV12900    Hearing Date: November 14, 2023    Dept: 34

SUBJECT:        Petition for Approval of Compromise of Claim or Action or Disposition of Proceeds of Judgment for Minor or Person with a Disability

Moving Party: Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem Lisa Tatum

Resp. Party:    None

Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem Lisa Tatum’s Petition is GRANTED, with the one change indicated below — i.e., that no attorney’s fees or costs are to be subtracted from the $151,666.66 awarded to the minor.

The funds are PERMITTED to be placed in blocked accounts that will not allow withdrawals of principal or interest without prior court order until the date at which the minor becomes 18 years old, at which point that minor may withdraw the principal and interest without a court order.

        Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem is ORDERED to deliver to the manager at the financial institution where the funds are to be deposited a certified or filed copy of this Order.

Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem is ORDERED to promptly file with the Court a receipt from the financial institution, acknowledging receipt of both the funds deposited and the order for deposit of funds.

BACKGROUND:

On April 5, 2021, Plaintiffs Rodolfo Salazar, Lisa Tatum, and London De Salazar filed their Complaint against Defendants Ricardo Oquendo and R.O. Housing, LLC on causes of action arising from Plaintiffs’ tenancy with Defendants.

On April 9, 2021, the Court appointed Plaintiff Lisa Tatum as the guardian ad litem for Plaintiff London De Salazar.

On May 2, 2023, Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint.

On September 5, 2023, Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint.

On November 13, 2023, Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem Lisa Tatum filed Judicial Council Form MC-350, Petition for Approval of Compromise of Claim or Action or Disposition of Proceeds of Judgment for Minor or Person with a Disability. Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem concurrently filed: (1) Judicial Council Form MC-351, which is a proposed order; and (2) Judicial Council Form MC-355, proposed Order to Deposit Funds in Blocked Account.

No opposition or other response has been filed to the Petition.

ANALYSIS:

I.           Legal Standard

“The guardian or conservator of the estate or guardian ad litem so appearing for any minor, person who lacks legal capacity to make decisions, or person for whom a conservator has been appointed shall have power, with the approval of the court in which the action or proceeding is pending, to compromise the same, to agree to the order or judgment to be entered therein for or against the ward or conservatee, and to satisfy any judgment or order in favor of the ward or conservatee or release or discharge any claim of the ward or conservatee pursuant to that compromise. . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 372, subd. (a)(3).)

“A petition for court approval of a compromise or covenant not to sue under Code of Civil Procedure section 372 must comply with rules 7.950 or 7.950.5, 7.951, and 7.952.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1384(a).)

“A petition for court approval of a compromise of, or a covenant not to sue or enforce judgment on, a minor's disputed claim; a compromise or settlement of a pending action or proceeding to which a minor or person with a disability is a party; or the disposition of the proceeds of a judgment for a minor or person with a disability under Probate Code sections 3500 and 3600-3613 or Code of Civil Procedure section 372 must be verified by the petitioner and must contain a full disclosure of all information that has any bearing upon the reasonableness of the compromise, covenant, settlement, or disposition. Except as provided in rule 7.950.5, the petition must be submitted on a completed Petition for Approval of Compromise of Claim or Action or Disposition of Proceeds of Judgment for Minor or Person With a Disability (form MC-350).” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.950.)

“In all cases under Code of Civil Procedure section 372 or Probate Code sections 3600-3601, unless the court has approved the fee agreement in advance, the court must use a reasonable fee standard when approving and allowing the amount of attorney's fees payable from money or property paid or to be paid for the benefit of a minor or a person with a disability.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.955(a)(1).)

“The court must give consideration to the terms of any representation agreement made between the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability and must evaluate the agreement based on the facts and circumstances existing at the time the agreement was made, except where the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability contemplated that the attorney's fee would be affected by later events.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.955(a)(2).)

“A petition requesting court approval and allowance of an attorney's fee under (a) must include a declaration from the attorney that addresses the factors listed in (b) that are applicable to the matter before the court.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.955(c).)

II.       Discussion

A.      Approval of the Petition

Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem petitions the Court for approval of a compromise that includes Plaintiff London De Salazar, who is an eight-year-old minor. Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem also requests an order for the deposit of the minor’s funds in a blocked account. Forms MC-350, MC-351, and MC-355 have been filed. 

Among other things, the Gross Settlement Amount is $455,000.00, which consists of equal payments among Plaintiffs. (Petition, Items 10, 11.b.(5).)

According to the attached Attorney-Client Retainer Agreement, the percentage of attorney’s fees to be assessed from each of the Plaintiffs is 24.5% of their respective awards. (Petition, Attachment 17a, p. 2.) In addition, Plaintiffs’ Counsel seeks $30,758.09 in costs, to be further assessed from the awards. (Id. at Item 13.b. and Attachment 13b.)

Notably, this case involved allegations of lead poisoning in the minor, and a psychological testing report has been attached to the Petition. (See Second Amended Complaint, ¶ 17; Petition, Attachment 8.)

        Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 372 and California Rules of Court, rules 7.950 and 7.955, the Court finds that the Compromise is generally reasonable and that the applicable procedures have been followed.

        The Court will grant the petition with the following change: the attorneys are not to assess any attorney’s fees or costs against the funds allotted to the minor, London De Salazar. In other words, the minor is to receive the full $151,666.66 awarded.

        With the above change, the Court GRANTS the Petition.

B.      Order to Deposit Funds in Blocks Account

1.      Legal Standard

“In any case in which the court orders that funds to be received by a minor or a person with a disability must be deposited in a financial institution and not disbursed without further order of the court, the order must include a provision that a certified or filed endorsed copy of the order must be delivered to a manager at the financial institution where the funds are to be deposited, and that a receipt from the financial institution must be promptly filed with the court, acknowledging receipt of both the funds deposited and the order for deposit of funds.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.953, subd. (a).)

“If, in the order approving the compromise of a minor's claim, there is a finding that the minor will attain the age of majority on a definite date, the order for deposit may require that the depository permit the withdrawal of funds by the former minor after that date, without further order of the court.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.953, subd. (a).)

2.      Discussion

        Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem filed Form MC-355, Order to Deposit Funds in Blocked Account. Form MC-355 lists the minor’s birthday, requests that no withdrawal of interest or principal be allowed without court order prior to the minor’s 18th birthday, and requests that such withdrawals can be made by the minor without court order once they reach 18 years of age.

The Court PERMITS the funds to be placed in blocked accounts that will not allow withdrawals of principal or interest without prior court order until the date at which the minor becomes 18 years old, at which point that minor may withdraw the principal and interest without a court order.

        The Court ORDERS Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem to deliver to the manager at the financial institution where the funds are to be deposited a certified or filed copy of this Order.

        The Court ORDERS Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem to promptly file with the Court a receipt from the financial institution, acknowledging receipt of both the funds deposited and the order for deposit of funds.

III.     Conclusion

Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem Lisa Tatum’s Petition is GRANTED, with the one change indicated above — i.e., that no attorney’s fees or costs are to be subtracted from the $151,666.66 awarded to the minor.

The funds are PERMITTED to be placed in blocked accounts that will not allow withdrawals of principal or interest without prior court order until the date at which the minor becomes 18 years old, at which point that minor may withdraw the principal and interest without a court order.

        Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem is ORDERED to deliver to the manager at the financial institution where the funds are to be deposited a certified or filed copy of this Order.

Plaintiff/Guardian ad Litem is ORDERED to promptly file with the Court a receipt from the financial institution, acknowledging receipt of both the funds deposited and the order for deposit of funds.