Judge: Michael Shultz, Case: BC656033, Date: 2023-12-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC656033    Hearing Date: January 23, 2024    Dept: A

BC656033 Jorge Huitron, et al v. Derrick Cabrera, City of Hawthorne

Tuesday, January 23, 2024, at 8:30 a.m.

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING TWO PETITIONS FOR APPROVAL OF COMPROMISE OF MINORS’ SETTLEMENT

      The complaint filed on April 3, 2017, alleges that Plaintiffs sustained injury on March 21, 2016, when Defendants’ police cruiser struck Plaintiffs’ vehicle. Plaintiff, Jenny Oliden, was pregnant at the time of the incident. The twin Plaintiffs, Audrey Huitron and Scarlett Huitron, were born prematurely, five days after the incident.

      Petitioner is Plaintiff, Jenny Oliden, the mother, and Guardian ad Litem of the minor claimant who seeks approval of the Plaintiffs’ settlement, as shown below. (CA R LOS ANGELES SUPER CT Rule 4.115.) The parties globally settled the claims for $11,400,000 to be distributed as follows:

      Both claimants suffered traumatic brain injury as a result of the incident, resulting in cognitive and speech delays.

      Each claimants’ medical expenses were reduced from $481,616.84 for Scarlett and $572,845.04 for Audrey. The following expenses will be reimbursed to the medical care providers according to their letter agreements to accept a reduced lien amount. (Decl. of John J. Rice, Lien Negotiator.)

      Plaintiffs’ counsel requests attorney’s fees totaling $1,750,000, which is 35 percent of each minor claimant’s recovery. (Cal. Rules of Court, 7.955.) In determining a reasonable fee, the court may consider the following non-exclusive factors: the fact that a person with a disability is involved and that person’s circumstances; the amount of the fee in proportion to the value of the services performed; the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved and the skill required; the amount involved and the results obtained; the experience, reputation, and ability of counsel and the attorney’s relative sophistication. If the fee is contingent, the court considers the risk of loss borne by counsel, the amount of costs advanced, and the delay in payment of fees and obtaining reimbursement for costs. (Cal. Rules of Court, 7.955 subd. (b).)

      The Court has considered the declaration of Plaintiffs’ counsel, Gregory Rizio, who took this case on a contingency fee basis and who advanced costs. He attests to the case’s difficulty and complexity, specifically in establishing that the Claimants’ injuries were caused by Defendants, and establishing whether Claimants’ mother should have been on bed rest at the time of the incident. The Court finds the fee request is reasonable under all the circumstances.

      The Court has reviewed the billing records of counsel for costs incurred in litigating this matter. Costs incurred exclusively on behalf of the minor Claimants were divided equally. Otherwise, counsel allocated 1/3 of the remaining costs between the three Plaintiffs. Accordingly, the distribution of the gross settlement amount for each Claimant is as follows:

      For each Claimant, the Guardian ad Litem proposes to use $2,500,000 from each Claimant’s net settlement to fund a single-premium deferred annuity for their benefit. The balance of $464,080.83 will be transferred to a trust created for each Claimant.

      The Probate Division has reviewed the trust terms and concluded that the main requirements for court created or funded trusts have been met. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.903(c) and LASC rule 4.116(b).)

      The Court has considered Petitioners’ additional request to grant authority to the trustee to invest in mutual funds and bonds with maturity dates greater than five years to provide for diversification and a higher rate of investment return.  (Attachment 18b(7).)  Given the size of the trust assets, the Court GRANTS Petitioners’ request.

      The Court also GRANTS distribution of $3,500 in fees to trust specialist counsel, the Dale Law Firm, for tasks relating to each minor’s settlement trust including drafting of the trust instruments and related portions of this petition.   

      The posting of a bond is ordinarily required of a trustee unless the trustee is a corporate fiduciary. (California Rules of Court, Rule 7.903(c)(5), Probate Code section 2320.) The proposed trustee is Capital First Trust Company. Accordingly, posting of a bond is not required.   

      Based on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS both petitions for approval of settlement, distribution, and the creation and funding of the proposed trust. Petitioners are ordered to file LASC Form PRO 044 forthwith to open a trust supervision action in the Probate Division. Petitioners shall file a first trust accounting by March 24, 2025 in the trust supervision action at which time the Probate Division will set an OSC re Accounting. This Court sets an OSC re: funding of settlement and purchase of annuity for April 1, 2024, at 8:30 a.m. in Department A of the Compton Courthouse.