Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 23PSCV03187, Date: 2025-04-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23PSCV03187    Hearing Date: April 14, 2025    Dept: G

Petitioner Jose Antonio Avalos’ Petition for Expedited Approval of Compromise of Claim or Action or Disposition of Proceeds of Judgment for Minor or Person with a Disability

 

Respondent: NO OPPOSITION

 

TENTATIVE RULING

 

Petitioner Jose Antonio Avalos’ Petition for Expedited Approval of Compromise of Claim or Action or Disposition of Proceeds of Judgment for Minor or Person with a Disability for Claimant Jaselle Avalos, a Minor is CONTINUED to a date to be determined in Department G (Pomona).

 

BACKGROUND

 

This is a personal injury action arising from a motor vehicle collision. On October 16, 2021, plaintiffs Jessica Avalos and Jaselle Avalos (collectively, Plaintiffs) were driving along Azusa Cayon Road when defendant Adrian Esparza made a left turn in front of Plaintiffs’ vehicle.

 

On October 13, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a complaint against defendants Adrian Esparza, Violeta Esparza (collectively, Defendants), and Does 1 through 30, alleging a cause of action for motor vehicle negligence.

 

On October 20, 2023, the court approved an application and order for appointment of guardian ad litem, appointing Jose Antonio Avalos as guardian ad litem for Jaselle Avalos.

 

On July 2, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a notice of settlement of the entire case.

 

On March 24, 2025, Jose Antonio Avalos filed this present petition. A hearing on the petition is set for April 14, 2025, along with an order to show cause re: dismissal (settlement).

 

ANALYSIS

 

Petitioner Jose Antonio Avalos (Petitioner) petitions for the court’s approval of a $15,000 settlement reached between claimant Jaselle Avalos (Claimant) and Defendants. For the following reasons, the court CONTINUES the hearing on the present petition.

 

Legal Standard

 

An enforceable settlement of a minor’s or incompetent’s claim can only be consummated with court approval. (Prob. Code, §§ 2504, 3500, 3600 et seq.; Code Civ. Proc., § 372.) For this purpose, a petition for approval must be presented to the court and until it is granted, there is no final settlement. (Scruton v. Korean Air Lines Co. (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 1596, 1603-1606.) Any settlement agreement therefore is voidable by the minor’s guardian ad litem. (Id. at p. 1606.)

 

Probate Code section 3600, et seq., governs how the settlement proceeds are to be paid. Under Probate Code section 3601, the order shall approve payment of reasonable expenses from the settlement as follows:

 

The court making the order or giving the judgment referred to in Section 3600, as a part thereof, shall make a further order authorizing and directing that such reasonable expenses (medical or otherwise and including reimbursement to a parent, guardian, or conservator), costs, and attorney’s fees, as the court shall approve and allow therein, shall be paid from the money or other property to be paid or delivered for the benefit of the minor or incompetent person. (Prob. Code, § 3601, subd. (a).)

 

In cases pursuant to Probate Code section 3601, “unless the court has approved the fee agreement in advance, the court must use a reasonable fee standard when approving and allowing the amount of attorney’s fees payable from money or property paid or to be paid for the benefit of a minor or a person with a disability.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.955(a)(1).) In doing so, “[t]he court must give consideration to the terms of any representation agreement made between the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability and must evaluate the agreement based on the facts and circumstances existing at the time the agreement was made, except where the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability contemplated that the attorney's fee would be affected by later events.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.955(a)(2).)

 

Discussion


Pursuant to the settlement agreement reached between the parties, Defendants agree to pay a total of $15,000 to Claimant. (Petition, ¶ 11.) The Petition requests $3,750 in attorney fees and $300 in costs. (Petition, ¶ 14.) However, the Petition fails to include a declaration from the attorney explaining the basis for the fees, a written attorney fee agreement, and any supporting documentation that establishes the costs incurred.

 

Petitioner states that Claimant has completely recovered from the accident but does not include a doctor’s report diagnosing Claimant’s injuries or Claimant’s recovery, or a report of Claimant’s current condition. (Petition, ¶ 9(a).)

 

Petitioner claims that there are $7,406 in medical expenses but states that $3,300 will be paid or reimbursed from the proceeds. (Petition, ¶ 13(a).) Petitioner does not explain why the total medical expenses differ from the amount to be paid or reimbursed.

 

Additionally, Petitioner claims that Philomena N. Nzegge, Esq., Claimant’s counsel, only represents Claimant. (Petition, ¶ 18(a).)  However, the complaint asserts that Nzegge is the attorney for both Jessica Avalos and Claimant. (Compl., p. 1.) The court’s file indicates that attorney Nzegge has not filed a motion to be relieved as counsel of record for Jessica Avalos.

 

Petitioner states that $7,650 will be deposited in insured accounts but does not provide the name, branch, and address of each depository. (Petition, ¶ 19(b)(2).)

 

In determining whether to grant a guardian ad litem’s petition to approve a settlement of the ward’s claims, a court must determine whether it is reasonable and in the minor’s best interest. (Chui v. Chui (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 873, 899.) Here, the court finds the Petition is insufficient. Thus, the court will require Claimant’s counsel to submit supplemental briefing that outlines why this settlement is reasonable and why it is in the minor’s best interest.

 

Accordingly, the court CONTINUES the hearing on the present petition to a date to be determined in Department G (Pomona) and orders Claimant’s counsel to file a supplemental declaration and briefing that addresses the issues noted above no later than nine (9) court days before the hearing scheduled in Department G.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Based on the foregoing, Claimant’s petition for approval of a minor’s compromise is CONTINUED to a date to be determined in Department G (Pomona). Claimant’s counsel is further ordered to file a supplemental declaration and briefing that:

 

(1) outlines why the proposed compromise is reasonable and in Claimant’s best interest;

(2) explains the requested attorney fees;

(3) provides a written attorney fee agreement;

(4) provides an outline and supporting documentation for the costs requested;

(5) includes an original or a photocopy of any doctor’s report containing a diagnosis of Claimant’s injuries or a prognosis for Claimant’s recovery;

(6) includes a report of Claimant’s current medical condition;

(7) explains why the total medical expenses differ from the amount to be paid or reimbursed;

(8) explains how Claimant’s counsel only represents Claimant when Claimant’s counsel has not filed a motion to be relieved as counsel as to Jessica Avalos; and

(9) provides the name, branch, and address of each depository.

 

Such briefing is due to the court no later than nine (9) court days before the next hearing on the present petition.