Judge: Nathan R. Scott, Case: Maldonado vs. Hipolito, Date: 2022-10-07 Tentative Ruling

Good Faith Settlement

Defendant Mario Hipolito Romero’s motion to contest good faith settlement is denied.  (See Code of Civil Procedure § 877.6(d).)

Defendant fails to show defendant Stater Bros. Markets’ settlement is “so far out of the ballpark” to have been made in bad faith.  (Nutrition Now, Inc. v. Superior Court (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 209, 213, cleaned up.) 

While the application lacks the specific settlement amount, the amount was disclosed to defendant who does not dispute it represents approximately 5% of plaintiff’s total damages.  (See Samaniego decl. ¶ 13; see also Opp. at p. 6.)  That would pencil out to at least $37,500.  (See Reply at p. 3 [plaintiff alleges $744,387 in past medical expenses].) 

This 5% approximation of Stater Bros.’ potential liability to plaintiff is adequately based on the state of the evidence.  (See Samaniego decl. ¶ 11 & Ex. A.)  As the court noted in granting the food truck’s MSJ, responsibility for plaintiff’s injuries most plausibly lies with the driver who hit him and with plaintiff himself for standing in a parking stall with his back to traffic.  (Ibid.; accord Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011) 194 Cal.App.4th 939, 960, 964-965 [court can rely on its own experience when evaluating potential liability].)

To briefly address other Tech-Bilt factors:  Stater Bros. has minimal, if any, potential liability for equitable indemnity to the nonsettling defendant; there is only one plaintiff; and Stater Bros. naturally should pay less in settlement that it would if it lost at trial. (Cahill, supra, 194 Cal.App.4th at pp. 965, 968.)

It is Romero’s burden to show Stater Bros. “had the financial capacity or insurance coverage limits to pay a reasonable settlement amount.”  (Cahill, supra, 194 Cal.App.4th at p. 968.)  Because the approximated settlement amount is reasonable and there is no reason to  “‘discount[]’ that amount based on any purported financial insolvency or insurance limitations, [this] Tech–Bilt factor [is] irrelevant to the court's determination.”  (Ibid.)

Stater Bros.’ MSJ

As the court finds Stater Bros.’ settlement with plaintiff was entered in good faith, its summary judgment motion is taken off calendar.

Defendant Romero shall give notice of all rulings.