Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 22STCV04097, Date: 2024-03-26 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV04097 Hearing Date: March 26, 2024 Dept: 29
Petition to
Approve Minor’s Compromise for Matteo Devita (Age 13).
Tentative:
The Court excuses the personal appearance of the claimant and the
guardian ad litem. Counsel may appear by telephone or video conference
call.
The Court has reviewed the petition
filed on February 26, 2024. There are a number of deficiencies that must be
addressed before the Court can approve the petition including:
(1) Item
1 (and Item 2 of the Proposed Order). Petitioner
files petition as parent only.
Petitioner is also the minor child’s guardian ad litem (see Order dated
February 3, 2022), and the Petition (and Proposed Order) should reflect this.
(2) Item
11b(6) requires that the reasons for the apportionment of settlement payments
must be set forth in Attachment 11b(6).
Attachment 11b(6) does not do so.
(3) Item
13a, required Attachment 13a, Declaration of Mia Wong does not address the factors in California
Rules of Court, rule 7.955(b), as required.
(4) Item
13b, continued on Attachment 13b, does not provide any support for the cost charged
to claimant of $150, other than the general statement that it is based on “one-half administrative costs of
$300.”
(5) Item
18a(2). Petitioner states that he is “the
guardian or conservator of the estate of the minor” but there is no evidence of
any estate of the claimant. Although the
Petition and Proposed Orders are not consistent, if Petitioner proposes that
the settlement proceeds be placed into a blocked account, then Item 18b(2)
should be checked, the amount to be deposited should be filled in, and the
name, branch, and address of the depository must be specified in an Attachment
18b(2).
Therefore, the Petition to Approve
Minor’s Compromise is DENIED without prejudice.
Petitioner may submit a new petition addressing all of the deficiencies set
forth above.