Judge: Robert P. Dahlquist, Case: 37-2020-00040278-CU-PA-NC, Date: 2023-11-03 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

SOUTH BUILDING TENTATIVE RULINGS - November 02, 2023

11/03/2023  01:30:00 PM  N-29 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Robert P Dahlquist

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  PI/PD/WD - Auto Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2020-00040278-CU-PA-NC CRIMMINS VS DAVIS [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement, 09/21/2023

Defendants Saloon Entertainment, LLC and Dale Eugene Polselli's motion for determination of good faith settlement (ROA # 499) is granted.

Plaintiff Dane Forest Crimmins' request for joinder (ROA # 502) is granted. Plaintiff Alonso Gabriel Rodriguez Banister's request for joinder (ROA # 503) is granted.

For a settlement to be found to be made in good faith, the settlement must be within the reasonable range of the settling tortfeasor's share of liability for the plaintiff's injuries, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the particular case. See Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & Associates (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488, 499.

Factors to be considered in this good-faith determination include: (1) a rough approximation of plaintiff's total recovery and the settlor's proportionate liability; (2) the amount paid in settlement; (3) a recognition that the settlor should pay less in settlement than if found liable after a trial; (4) the allocation of the settlement proceeds among plaintiffs; (5) the settlor's financial condition and insurance policy limits, if any; and (6) evidence of any collusion, fraud, or tortious conduct between the settlor and the plaintiffs aimed at making the nonsettling parties pay more than their fair share. Id. A determination as to the good faith of a settlement requires the trial court to examine and weigh these factors, one of the most important of which is the settling party's proportionate liability. Mattco Forge, Inc. v. Arthur Young & Co. (1994) 38 Cal.App.4th 1337, 1350.

At the hearing on the motion, the non-settling party has the burden of showing the settlement was not made in good faith. CCP § 877.6(d).

The court has carefully read and considered all of the papers submitted by the parties in connection with this motion. The court has also balanced and weighed the evidence in light of the relevant factors established by applicable case law. The court is persuaded that plaintiffs Alonso Gabriel Rodriguez and Dane Forrest Crimmins' settlement of their claims against defendants Saloon Entertainment, LLC and Dale Eugene Polselli is a good faith settlement under CCP § 877.6 and applicable case law.

Therefore, the motion is granted.

This is the tentative ruling for an appearance hearing (in person or remote) at 1:30 p.m. on Friday, November 3, 2023. If no party appears at the hearing, this tentative ruling will become the order of the court as of November 3, 2023. If the parties are satisfied with the court's tentative ruling or do not Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3023625 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  CRIMMINS VS DAVIS [IMAGED]  37-2020-00040278-CU-PA-NC otherwise wish to argue the motion, they are encouraged to give notice to the court and each other of their intention not to appear, though this notice is not required.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3023625