Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 19STCV06763, Date: 2023-10-03 Tentative Ruling


Case Number: 19STCV06763    Hearing Date: October 3, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, 

Plaintiff(s),  

vs. 

 

ALFREDO CAMPOS ROBLEDO, 

 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

      CASE NO: 19STCV06763 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING SET ASIDE AND ENTRY OF JUDGMENT 

 

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

October 3, 2023   

  

I. Background 

On February 27, 2019, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Alfredo Campos Robledo (“Defendant”) for a subrogation claim arising from a motor vehicle incident, wherein Plaintiff paid for damages of its insured.  

On September 14, 2021, the Court dismissed the action pursuant to the parties’ stipulation for entry of judgment. The Court retained jurisdiction over the action pursuant to Code Civ. Proc., section 664.6. 

On June 27, 2023, Plaintiff filed this motion to set aside dismissal. Plaintiff seeks a court order setting aside dismissal pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. section 664.6 on the grounds that Defendant breached the terms of their written stipulation for entry of judgment. No opposition was filed.  

 

II. Legal Standard 

Code Civ. Proc., section 664.6 provides that “[i]f parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside the presence of the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement.  If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.” (Code Civ. Proc., section 664.6.) 

“‘[V]oluntary dismissal of an action or special proceeding terminates the court’s jurisdiction over the matter.’”  (Mesa RHF Partners, L.P. v. City of Los Angeles (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 913, 917 [quoting In re Conservatorship of Martha P. (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 857, 967) (alteration in original).)  “‘If requested by the parties,’ however, ‘the [trial] court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce [a] settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.’”  (Id. (quoting CCP section 664.6) (emphasis in original).)  “‘Because of its summary nature, strict compliance with the requirements of section 664.6 is prerequisite to invoking the power of the court to impose a settlement agreement.’”  (Id. (quoting Sully-Miller Contracting Co. v. Gledson/Cashman Construction, Inc. (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 30, 37).) 

“A request for the trial court to retain jurisdiction under section 664.6 ‘must conform to the same three requirements which the Legislature and the courts have deemed necessary for section 664.6 enforcement of the settlement itself: the request must be made (1) during the pendency of the case, not after the case has been dismissed in its entirety, (2) by the parties themselves, and (3) either in a writing signed by the parties or orally before the court.’”  (Id. (quoting Wackeen v. Malis (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 429, 440).)  “The ‘request must be express, not implied from other language, and it must be clear and unambiguous.’”  (Id. (quoting Wackeen, supra, 97 Cal.App.4th at 440).) 

 

III. Discussion 

Plaintiff moves to set aside dismissal on the grounds that Defendant breached the terms of their stipulation for entry of judgment. The order for dismissal states that the Court retains jurisdiction of the case under Code Civ. Proc., section 664.6. 

The parties’ stipulation reads in pertinent part: 

 

  1. In the event of a breach of this Stipulation for Entry of Judgment, Judgment shall be entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant in the sum of THIRTY-ONE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-THREE DOLLARS AND SIXTY-FIVE CENTS ($31,373.65) plus costs of suit and prejudgment interest from the date of the loss less any monies paid to date of breach. 

 

  1. Defendant shall discharge his obligation pursuant to this Stipulation and Plaintiff agrees to stay the filing and entry of Judgment upon the following terms and conditions: 

 

  1. Defendant ALFREDO CAMPOS ROBLEDO shall pay the sum THIRTEEN THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY-TWO DOLLARS AND SIXTY-SIX CENTS ($13,162.66) as follows: 

 

  1. The sum of $7,862.66 to be paid by Defendant's insurance carrier Farmers Insurance Company, however if Fanners fails to pay the amount as contemplated or this amount is reapportioned so that Plaintiff receives less of the policy limits than as contemplated in this agreement, then the Defendant shall pay the difference plus the balance of the payments as set forth below. 

  1. The sum of $5,300.00 to be paid in monthly installments of $100.00 commencing October 1, 2021 and continuing thereafter (on the first day of each succeeding month) until the entire amount due is paid in full. 

 

  1. Said payments hereunder shall be made payable to BENSON LEGAL CLIENT TRUST referencing Defendant's file number SF180689 and transmitted to BENSON LEGAL, APC, 19 8550 Balboa Blvd, Suite 290, Northridge CA 91325. 

[….] 

 

  1. Upon timely payment in full of the amount set forth hereinabove, to wit, the total sum of $13,162.66, Plaintiff shall forward the original Stipulation to Defendant marked paid in full. 

 

  1. In the event that Defendant shall default by failing to make any payments provided hereunder when due or at all pursuant to paragraph 7 hereinbelow, Plaintiff may immediately cause Judgment to be entered pursuant to the terms set forth in this Stipulation for the full amount of the agreed upon judgment as set forth in Paragraph 1 less any monies paid to date of the breach; and shall also file a partial Satisfaction of Judgment for all sums previously paid pursuant to this Stipulation. 

 

[…] 

  1. Defendant shall be permitted a fifteen day grace period for payment of any installment due hereunder. Plaintiff shall give written notice to Defendant of his default; and, Defendant shall then be allowed an additional ten days from the date of said written notice to cure that particular default Should Defendant fail to cure the default, Plaintiff shall be permitted to request entry of judgment as set forth hereinabove. […] 

(Mot., Exh. 1.) 

Plaintiff’s counsel declares that after the parties signed the stipulation, Defendant made payments in the total sum of $1,697 plus $7,862.66 from Defendant’s insurer, leaving a balance due of $3,603. (Benson Decl., ¶5.) Plaintiff’s counsel sent a letter of default to Defendant on April 13, 2023. (Id., ¶6.) Plaintiff now requests that the Court enter Judgment in favor of Plaintiff for a total principal of $21,813.99, which is the principal $31,373.65 less the $9,559.66 paid. (Id. at ¶8.) Plaintiff further requests the additional sum of $527.15 for costs of the suit and $72 in filing costs for bringing the instant motion. 

Because Defendant breached the terms of the stipulation, Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED. The Court will set aside dismissal and enter judgment in the amount of $22,413.14 in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant.  

 

III. Conclusion 

Plaintiff’s Motion is GRANTED. 

 

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.   

 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: 

  • Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement. 

  • If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling,¿the party must send an email to the court at¿sscdept31@lacourt.org¿with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.¿ The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.¿¿ 

  • Unless¿all¿parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.¿ You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.¿¿ 

  • If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.¿ After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.¿ 

 

Dated this 2nd day of October 2023 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court