Judge Randolph M. Hammock, Case Number: BC708166, Date: 2023-08-09 Tentative Ruling

On September 26, 2018, Plaintiffs filed their third amended complaint for (1) breach of contract (Milk Barn and ABC), (2) breach of contract (Mircoseries and ABC), (3) breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing (Milk Barn and ABC), (4) breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing (Microseries and ABC), (5) intentional interference with contractual relationship (Milk Barn and ABC), (6) intentional interference with contractual relationship (Microseries and ABC), (7) breach of oral contract, and (8) breach of implied-in-fact contract.

Plaintiffs allege the following: In 2016, Defendant ABC (which owns Disney Junior, and is referred to as “ABC” hereafter) released the first season of the children’s show “Goldie & Bear” on the Disney Junior Channel which was produced by Plaintiffs Milk Barn and Microseries, family businesses managed by Jan Korbelin. Shortly before the first season concluded its first run, ABC informed Plaintiff Korbelin that the Plaintiffs’ services would no longer be necessary. In doing so, ABC breached the contracts it had with Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs allege that ABC plotted and robbed Plaintiffs of their hit show and then lured their personnel away, took their animation equipment, and destroyed their production companies.

On March 21, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Settlement of Entire Case. At the June 9, 2023 OSC Re: Dismissal, this court granted Plaintiffs Milk Barn, Inc. and Jan Korbelin's oral motion to dismiss with prejudice ABC Cable Networks Group. The court also granted Cross-Complainant ABC Cable Networks Group's oral motion to dismiss with prejudice Cross-Defendant Microseries, Inc.

Defendant/Cross-Complainant ABC now moves to enter judgment on the terms of a settlement under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. The motion is unopposed.

If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside of 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.

“Strong public policy in favor of the settlement of civil cases gives the trial court, which approves the settlement, the power to enforce it.” (Osumi v. Sutton (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 1355, 1357.) Likewise, in “ruling on a motion to enforce settlement,” the Court “necessarily has the power to resolve factual disputes relating to the agreement.” (Ibid.) This also means that it is “for the trial court to determine in the first instance whether the parties have entered into an enforceable settlement.” (Id. at 1360.)

On March 21, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Settlement of Entire Case. At the June 9, 2023, OSC Re: Dismissal, this court granted Plaintiffs Milk Barn, Inc. and Jan Korbelin's oral motion to dismiss with prejudice ABC Cable Networks Group. The court also granted Cross-Complainant ABC Cable Networks Group's oral motion to dismiss with prejudice Cross-Defendant Microseries, Inc.

“When a court has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of a suit, its jurisdiction continues until a final judgment is entered. When there is a voluntary dismissal of an entire action, the court's jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter terminates. In contrast, a dismissal by only some of the plaintiffs means the court is not divested of subject matter jurisdiction and the suit continues.” (Wackeen v. Malis (2002) 97 Cal. App. 4th 429, 437 [internal citations omitted].)

Here, ABC’s Cross-Complaint is still pending. Thus, the court maintains jurisdiction in the pending matter to rule on this motion, as no final judgment has been entered.

ABC represents that the parties—ABC, Milk Barn, Microseries, and Korbelin—entered into a written and fully executed Settlement Agreement on April 27, 2023. (Phillips Decl. ¶ 5, Exh. C.) The Settlement Agreement, filed by ABC under seal, imposed various obligations on the parties. (Id.) ABC represents that it has complied with the terms of the Settlement, while Milk Barn, on the other, has failed to comply with one or more of its obligations. (Phillips Decl. ¶¶ 6, 7, 8.)

The Settlement Agreement is in writing, signed by the parties, and was made and filed in the course of pending litigation. (See § 664.6(a).) ABC has presented evidence of Milk Barn’s breach of the settlement. (Phillips Decl. ¶¶ 6, 7, 8.) By failing to oppose, Milk Barn has not disputed the existence of the signed Settlement Agreement or its breach of same. [FN 1]

FN 1 - ABC’s Proof of Service attached to the Notice and Motion shows service of the moving papers on Plaintiffs Milk Barn, Inc., Microseries, Inc., and Jan Korbelin electronically on July 18, 2023.