Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 18STCV00849, Date: 2023-02-09 Tentative Ruling

Tentative rulings are sometimes, but not always, posted. The purpose of posting a tentative ruling is to to help focus the argument. The posting of a tentative ruling is not an invitation for the filing of additional papers shortly before the hearing.

Case Number: 18STCV00849    Hearing Date: February 9, 2023    Dept: 53

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles – Central District

Department 53

MOVING PARTY:                 Defendant Par Engineering, Inc., d/b/a Commercial Cooling          

RESPONDING PARTY:       Unopposed  

Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement

The court considered the moving papers filed in connection with this motion.  No opposition papers were filed.

DISCUSSION

Defendant Par Engineering, Inc., d/b/a Commercial Cooling (“Defendant”) moves the court for an order determining that the settlement entered into by and between Defendant, on the one hand, and plaintiffs Karine Aladzhanzian, Vardevar Aladzadzhian, and Vahe Aladzhanzian, a minor by and through his Guardian ad Litem Karine Aladzhanzian (“Plaintiffs”), on the other hand, was made in good faith pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 877 and 877.6. 

Defendant and its insurers have agreed to settle this action with Plaintiff for the total amount of $5,000,000, subject to (1) the court’s finding that the settlement was made in good faith, and (2) the court’s approval of a petition for minor’s compromise as to minor plaintiff Vahe Aladzhanzian.  (Kahn Decl., ¶¶ 5-6.)

“[Code of Civil Procedure] Section 877.6 was enacted by the Legislature in 1980 to establish a statutory procedure for determining if a settlement by an alleged joint tortfeasor has been entered into in good faith and to provide a bar to claims of other alleged joint tortfeasors for equitable contribution or partial or comparative indemnity when good faith is shown.”  (IRM Corp. v. Carlson (1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 94, 104.)  Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6, subdivision (a)(1) provides, in relevant part, that, on noticed motion, “[a]ny party to an action wherein it is alleged that two or more parties are joint tortfeasors or co-obligors on a contract debt shall be entitled to a hearing on the issue of the good faith of a settlement entered into by the plaintiff . . . and one or more alleged tortfeasors or co-obligors . . . .”  “The party asserting the lack of good faith shall have the burden of proof on that issue.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 877.6, subd. (d).) 

When a motion for determination of good faith settlement is uncontested, a “barebones” motion that sets forth the ground of good faith, accompanied by a declaration which sets forth a brief background of the case, is sufficient to support a good faith determination.  (City of Grand Terrace v. Superior Court (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 1251, 1261.)   

The court has not received opposition papers from any other party involved in this action.  The court finds that (1) Defendant’s motion sets forth the ground of good faith for the parties’ settlement, and (2) the declarations of Paul Singh and Ruth Kahn and the moving papers set forth a brief background of the case, the expert opinion as to the liability of Defendant, and the terms of the settlement.  The court finds that Defendant’s motion and supporting evidence are sufficient to support a good faith determination and therefore grants Defendant’s motion.  (City of Grand Terrace, supra, 192 Cal.App.3d at p. 1261.)  

ORDER

The court grants defendant Par Engineering, Inc., d/b/a Commercial Cooling’s motion for determination of good faith settlement.

The court determines that the settlement entered into by and between plaintiffs Karine Aladzhanzian, Vardevar Aladzadzhian, and Vahe Aladzhanzian, a minor by and through his Guardian ad Litem Karine Aladzhanzian, on the one hand, and defendant Par Engineering, Inc., d/b/a Commercial Cooling, on the other hand, is in good faith within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6, subdivision (a).

All other joint tortfeasors or co-obligors are barred from any further claims against settling defendant Par Engineering, Inc., d/b/a Commercial Cooling for equitable comparative contribution, or partial or comparative indemnity, based on comparative negligence or comparative fault.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 877.6, subd. (c).) 

The court orders defendant Par Engineering, Inc., d/b/a Commercial Cooling to give notice of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:  February 9, 2023

_____________________________

Robert B. Broadbelt III

Judge of the Superior Court