Judge: Michael P. Linfield, Case: 21STCV29047, Date: 2023-02-15 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV29047 Hearing Date: February 15, 2023 Dept: 34
SUBJECT: Petition
for Approval of Compromise of Claim or Action or Disposition of Proceedings of
Judgment for Minor or Person with a Disability
Moving Party: Plaintiff/Petitioner/Guardian
ad Litem Sharese Bates
Resp. Party: None
Plaintiff/Petitioner/Guardian ad Litem Sharese Bates’ Petition
is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND:
(1) Breach of contract;
(2) Breach of implied
warranty of habitability;
(3) Intentional
infliction of emotional distress;
(4) Private nuisance;
(5) Negligence, and
(6) Violation of
California Civil Code section 1942.4.
On June 13, 2021, the
Court appointed Plaintiff Sharese Bates as the guardian ad litem for
Plaintiff Faith Starnes.
On October 27, 2021,
the Court found related cases 21STCV28518 and 21STCV20947, and designated
21STCV28518 as the lead case.
On December 8, 2021,
by request of Plaintiffs, the Clerk’s Office, dismissed without prejudice
Defendant Icon Realty Services, Inc. from the Complaint.
On March 1, 2022,
Defendants/Cross-Complainants Raj Sharm and Rita Sharma filed their
Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendant Village Park Condominium Association,
Inc.
On January 20, 2023,
Plaintiffs filed their Notice of Settlement of Entire Case.
On January 26, 2023,
Plaintiff filed their Petition for Approval of Compromise of Claim or Action or
Disposition of Proceedings of Judgment for Minor or Person with a Disability.
Plaintiffs concurrently filed their Proposed Order.
No opposition or
other response has been filed.
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, subd. (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, subd. (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.”
“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, subd. (c).)
II.
Discussion
Plaintiff/Petitioner/Guardian ad Litem Sharese Bates petitions
the Court for approval of a compromise that includes Plaintiff Faith Starnes,
who is a nine-year-old minor. A form MC-350 has been filed in connection with
the Petition.
Among other things, the Compromise includes a $2,000.00 payment to Plaintiff
Starnes, a $41,500.00 payment to Plaintiff Bates, and a $41,500.00 payment to
Plaintiff Arthur. According to the Attachment for Items 11b(3), 11b(5), and
11b(6), the larger settlement for the adults are due to them suffering more
from the conditions at issue in this litigation.
According to the Attachment for Item 17f, attorney’s fees are only to
be paid from the settlement amounts for Plaintiffs Bates and Arthur, but not
from Plaintiff Starnes, who is the only minor in this action. The percentage of
attorney’s fees to be assessed from Plaintiffs Bates and Arthur is 40%, which
would be $16,600.00 in attorney’s fees from each of them. (See also Petition,
Fee Agreement, ¶ 4.B.)
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure
section 372 and California Rules of Court, rule 7.950, the Court finds that the
Compromise is reasonable and that the applicable procedures have been followed.
Moreover, as no attorney’s fees are to be assessed from the minor, California
Rules of Court, rule 7.955 does not apply here.
The Court GRANTS the Petition.
III.
Conclusion
Plaintiff/Petitioner/Guardian ad Litem Sharese Bates’ Petition
is GRANTED.