Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 22STCV17662, Date: 2023-04-14 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV17662 Hearing Date: April 14, 2023 Dept: 31
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT
Plaintiffs Francisco Daganas Jr.
(“Daganas”) and Melody Frayco (“Frayco”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed
this action against defendants San Fernando Valley R. C. Flyers, Inc., Academy
of Model Aeronautics, City of Los Angeles, Van Alexander (“Alexander”), and
Does 1-50 for injuries Daganas sustained at Woodley Park Model Airplane Fields,
which is a part of the Sepulveda Dam Recreation area in Van Nuys. Plaintiffs
allege that Daganas was standing in an area meant for spectators watching model
aircraft activities at the fields when a radio-controlled model aircraft being
operated by Alexander suddenly and without warning struck Daganas. The complaint
alleges causes of action for negligence against all defendants, premises
liability against all defendants except Alexander, negligent infliction of
emotional distress against all defendants, loss of consortium by Frayco against
all defendants, and products liability against Does 25-50.
On December 1, 2022, Alexander
filed a notice of settlement providing that Plaintiffs and Alexander reached an
agreement to settle the claims against Alexander. That same day, Alexander
filed an application for determination of good faith settlement. However,
because the application reflected only select terms of an unfinalized
settlement agreement, the Court set a hearing for the application for
determination of good faith settlement for March 2, 2023, for the parties to
file the complete terms of the agreement. (Min. Order, Jan. 30, 2023.)
Despite being instructed that all
filings needed to comply with Code of Civil Procedure § 1005, Alexander’s
counsel belatedly filed a declaration with the fully executed settlement
between Plaintiffs and Alexander attached, and Plaintiffs’ counsel belatedly filed
a declaration requesting the application be granted. The proof of service
attached to each declaration show they were not electronically served on the
parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §§ 1005 and 1010.6.
As a result, the Court continued
the hearing to April 14, 2023 to ensure that all parties have sufficient notice
of the moving papers prior to the hearing. (Min. Order, March 2, 2023.)
At this time, Alexander has agreed
to settle its claims with Plaintiffs for $300,000. Alexander seeks an order from the Court
finding that the settlement is in good faith.
It is noted that no opposition has
been filed at this time; any opposition to the motion was due on or before April
3, 20223. The burden on a motion for
determination of good faith settlement rests squarely on the party opposing the
finding of good faith. (Code Civ. Proc. §877.6(d).) In light of the lack of opposition, no party
has met that burden. The motion for
determination of good faith settlement is therefore granted.
Moving Defendant is ordered to give
notice.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:
Dated this 14th day of April,
2023
|
|
|
|
|
Hon. Michelle
C. Kim Judge
of the Superior Court |