Judge: Richard Y. Lee, Case: 30-2020-01134407, Date: 2022-08-18 Tentative Ruling

Defendant Ana Solis moves this Court as follows:

for a determination that the settlement entered into between Plaintiff Dian Rivera and Defendant Solis constitutes a good faith settlement pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 877 and 877.6; and dismissing and barring all claims and cross-complaints for indemnity and/or contribution against Defendant Solis including all cross-complaints pending in the instant action.

If a motion for good faith determination is unopposed, a “barebones motion which sets forth the ground of good faith, accompanied by a declaration which sets forth a brief background of the case, is sufficient.” [City of Grand Terrace v. Superior Court (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 1251, 1261] The court is not required to expressly consider and weigh the factors that would otherwise be applicable. [Ibid.; see Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & Associates (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488, 499 [factors relevant to determining good faith]].

This motion is unopposed and meets this requirement.

Particularly of note, it appears Settling Defendant Solis has settled for roughly half the amount of Plaintiff’s alleged medical specials, and consequently within the “reasonable range of the settling tortfeasor's proportional share of comparative liability for the plaintiff’s injuries” taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the particular case. [Tech-Bilt v. Woodward-Clyde & Associates, 38 Cal.App.3d 488, 499 (1985)]

That is, Plaintiff will dismiss Defendant Solis from the Complaint with prejudice in exchange for a settlement amount of $25,000.00. Plaintiff claimed injuries to her neck and back with headaches and anxiety and has alleged medical specials in the amount of $49,454.76. (Kruid Decl. ¶6, Exhibit B [Plaintiff’s form interrogatory responses – see specifically, 6.2 – 6.4 responses]). This settlement reflects the policy limits for the insurance policy at issue in this claim. (Kruid Decl. ¶7, Exhibit C [Ana Solis’s form interrogatory responses – see specifically, 4.1 response re: policy limits]). Ana Solis has no other assets or insurance that would cover the accident. (Kruid Decl. ¶8, Exhibit D [Declaration of Ana Solis re: no other assets or insurance]).

As there is no opposition, there is no evidence of lack of good faith.

Therefore, the unopposed Motion for an Order Determining Good Faith Settlement is GRANTED pursuant to CCP§877.6.

Moving party to give notice.