Judge: Stephen Morgan, Case: MC028000, Date: 2023-08-15 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: MC028000 Hearing Date: August 15, 2023 Dept: A14
Court
approval is required for all settlements of a minor’s claim or that of a person
lacking the capacity to make decisions.
(Prob. Code, §§ 2504, 3500, 3600 et seq.; Code Civ. Proc., § 372; see Pearson
v. Superior Court (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 1333, 1337.) “[T]he protective
role the court generally assumes in cases involving minors, [is] a role to
assure that whatever is done is in the minor’s best interests . . . . [I]ts primary concern is whether the
compromise is sufficient to provide for the minor’s injuries, care and
treatment.” (Goldberg v. Superior
Court (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 1378, 1382.)
The
Court has reviewed the petitions at issue, brought by Felisha Gutierrez
(“Gutierrez”), Guardian ad Litem for minor Successors-in-Interest Anthony
Alegria, Izek Alegria, and Jade Alegria (collectively “Minor Claimants”). The
petitions cannot be approved. Specifically, the Court finds:
·
While it is presented that Gutierrez represents
Minor Claimants, and that the settlement will be split between Minor Claimants,
only the petitions for Anthony Alegria and Izek Alegria have been filed. There
has been no representation as to why Jade Alegria does not have her own
petition.
·
The petitions are incorrectly filled out. It
appears that the petitions seek to divide the medical expenses, attorney’s
fees, other non-medical expenses, and the profits equally among Minor
Claimants. However, as written, the petitions state that both Anthony Alegria
and Izek Alegria will be receiving a total of $948,400.43 (see Nos. 10 in each
petition) and, despite this representation, the petition further states that
each Minor Claimant will receive $20,000.00. Of note, this section does not
take into costs. The amount listed should be the amount each Minor Claimant
receives prior to the reduction of costs. Each Minor Claimant is also listed as
“other plaintiffs or claimants” despite one of them being on each petition,
respectively.
·
Mark Leonardo (“Leonardo”) who assisted in
preparing these petitions, seeks $216,235.19 in other non-medical expenses. On
the petitions, items are divided into (1) costs advanced on client’s behalf,
and (2) Loan advanced on client’s behalf. No attachment is provided for this
section; however, attachment 13(a) includes an exhibit which lays out the
costs. The Court has looked at it thoroughly and reminds counsel that costs are
governed by Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1033.5 and those costs he is seeking to
recover should adhere to statute.
·
An annuity for the amount of $20,000.00 is not
in the best interest of each Minor Claimant. As is, the petitions state that
$20,000.00 out of the total $60,000 to each Minor Claimant (after costs) will
be used to purchase an annuity. It appears that Gutierrez seeks to place all
proceeds into only one account. That is, all money will be combined and not
divided between Minor Claimants despite the presentation that each Minor
Claimant will be receiving $20,000.00 after costs.
·
The orders are incorrectly filed. Specifically,
it appears that Leonardo is using each order to reflect the full amount of
settlement, costs, and that $60,000 will be distributed equally among three
successors instead of a petition for each Minor Claimant.
Accordingly,
the Petitions for Anthony Alegria and Izek Alegria are DENIED without
prejudice.
New petitions are to be filed within 30 days.