Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 24PSCV01828, Date: 2024-12-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24PSCV01828    Hearing Date: December 5, 2024    Dept: G

Petitioner Stephanie Guzman’s Petition for Approval of Compromise of Claim or Action or Disposition of Proceeds of Judgment for Plaintiff Cataleya Guzman, a Minor

Respondent: NO OPPOSITION

TENTATIVE RULING

Petitioner Stephanie Guzman’s Petition for Approval of Compromise of Claim or Action or Disposition of Proceeds of Judgment for Plaintiff Cataleya Guzman, a Minor is CONTINUED to a date to be determined in Department G (Pomona). The Court further orders Plaintiff Cataleya Guzman’s counsel to file a supplemental declaration in support of the request for attorney fees no later than nine (9) court days before the hearing scheduled in Department G.

BACKGROUND

This is a wrongful death action. In June 2022, Defendant Eggleston Youth Centers, Inc. (Eggleston) admitted Frankie Avila into a residential drug treatment program in Baldwin Park. Avila subsequently died from a fentanyl overdose at Eggleston’s Baldwin Park facility. Frankie Avila was survived by a minor daughter, Plaintiff Cataleya Guzman.

On June 6, 2024, Cataleya Guzman, through guardian ad litem Stephanie Guzman, filed a complaint against Eggleston, Clarence Brown, Daniel Ojeda, Don Gutierrez, Omar Ortiz, and Does 1-50, alleging the following causes of action: (1) wrongful death, (2) general negligence, (3) fraud/misrepresentation, and (4) breach of contract.

On August 16, 2024, Cataleya Guzman filed a First Amended Complaint (FAC) against the same defendants alleging the following causes of action: (1) wrongful death, (2) premises liability, (3) general negligence, (4) violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200, and (5) breach of contract.

On October 28, 2024, Stephanie Guzman filed the present petition on Cataleya Guzman’s behalf.  A hearing on the petition is set for December 5, 2024, along with an OSC Re: Dismissal.

ANALYSIS

Stephanie Guzman petitions for the court’s approval of a $500,000.00 settlement reached between Cataleya Guzman and all 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. Pursuant to 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 7.955, subd. (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 7.955, subd. (a)(2).)

Discussion

Pursuant to the settlement agreement reached between the parties, Defendants agree to pay a total of $500,000.00 to Cataleya Guzman. (Petition, ¶ 10.)

With regard to attorney fees, a retainer agreement is attached to the declaration of counsel. In it, the attorney fees for Cataleya Guzman will be 42% of the net recovery. (Sterling Decl., Ex. A, § 3.) Here, Cataleya Guzman’s counsel requests $185,000.00 in attorney fees which is 37.79% of Cataleya Guzman’s net recovery.[1] (Petition, ¶ 13.) While counsel provided a supporting declaration that outlines counsel’s experience and qualifications, counsel does not provide an itemization or estimate of the total hours worked.  Without this information, the court cannot determine the reasonableness of attorney fees.

Accordingly, the court CONTINUES the hearing on the present petition to a date to be determined in Department G (Pomona) and orders Cataleya Guzman’s counsel to file a supplemental declaration in support of the request for attorney fees no later than nine (9) court days before the hearing scheduled in Department G.