Judge Steven A. Ellis, Case Number: 21STCV27021, Date: 2024-08-21 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 21STCV27021, Date: 2024-08-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV27021 Hearing Date: August 21, 2024 Dept: 29

State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. Rodriguez
21STCV27021
Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate Dismissal and Enter Judgment

Tentative

The motion is granted.

Background

On July 22, 2021, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Carlos Rodriguez aka Carlos Carpio (“Defendant”) for subrogation. On October 22, 2021, Defendant filed an answer.

On January 5, 2023, the parties notified the Court they had settled this matter.

On July 8, 2023, the Court entered an order dismissing the action and reserving jurisdiction pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.

Defendant defaulted on his obligations under the settlement agreement. (Reese Decl., ¶ 4.)

On May 29, 2024, Plaintiff filed this motion to vacate the dismissal and enter judgment against Defendant.

No opposition has been filed.

Legal Standard

Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6, subdivision (a) provides:

“If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside the presence of the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. If the parties to the settlement agreement or their counsel stipulate in writing or orally before the court, the court may dismiss the case as to the settling parties without prejudice and retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.”

In ruling on a motion to enter judgment, the court acts as a trier of fact. The court must determine whether the parties entered into a valid and binding settlement. To do so, the court may receive oral testimony in addition to declarations. (Kohn v. Jaymar-Ruby, Inc. (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 1530, 1533.) Section 664.6

In general, “where the plaintiff has filed a voluntary dismissal of an action …, the court is without jurisdiction to act further …, and any subsequent orders of the court are simply void.” (Paniagua v. Orange County Fire Auth. (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 83, 89, (internal quotes omitted).) But the result is different where a signed, written settlement agreement (or oral settlement before the court) states the court retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. (See Wackeen v. Malis (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 429, 439-440; Khavarian Enterprises, Inc. v. Commline, Inc. (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 310, 326—court had continuing jurisdiction to consider attorney fees and costs motions after dismissal where settlement agreement provided court retained jurisdiction to enforce agreement pursuant to section 664.6.))

Discussion

On June 26, 2023, Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a written stipulation for the entry of judgment, which would be discharged upon the payment of $18,100. (Reese Decl., ¶ 2 & Exh. A.) An initial payment of $10,000 was to be made by Infinity Insurance, followed by 12 payments of $75, followed by four payments of $1,800. (Id., Exh. A, ¶ 2.)

On July 8, 2023, the Court dismissed the case without prejudice and retained jurisdiction under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.

Defendant’s insurance carrier made a onetime $10,000 payment, and Defendant paid another $900 in the monthly payments. (Reese Decl., ¶¶ 4, 7.) But Defendant did not pay the balance ($7,200). (Id., ¶ 7.) Plaintiff now seeks to obtain a judgment for that amount, plus an additional $500 in costs, for a total of $7,700. (Ibid.)

The Court finds Plaintiff has established that there was a valid agreement between the parties, that the Court retained jurisdiction, and that Defendant did not perform in full the terms of the settlement agreement. Plaintiff has satisfied all substantive and procedural requirements for an order set aside the dismissal and entering judgment against Defendant. The motion is granted.

Conclusion

The Court GRANTS the motion to set aside the dismissal entered on July 8, 2023, and to enter judgment against Defendant in the amount of $7,700.00.

Moving Party is ORDERED to give notice.