Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50

MARIA DEL ALTAMIRANO SALINAS, et al. Plaintiffs, vs. H & Y INVESTMENTS, DBA, H & Y INVESTMENTS LP, et al. Defendants.	Case No.:	22STCV08374
	Hearing Date:	March 12, 2024
	Hearing Time:	10:00 a.m.
	[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PETITIONS TO APPROVE MINOR’S COMPROMISE OF PENDING ACTION (3)

Background

On March 8, 2022, Plaintiffs Jose Barbosa Hernandez[1]; Maria Del Altamirano Salinas; Haide Rubi Barbosa Altamirano; Luis Miguel Salado Jimenez; Michelle Barbosa; Rene Eliced Lopez Guardado; Noah Abel Barbosa, a minor by and through his Guardian Ad litem, Jose Barbosa Hernandez; Joshua Daniel Orejel, a minor by and through his Guardian Ad Litem Haide Rubi Barbosa Altamirano; and Zoe Bella Salado, a minor by and through her Guardian Ad Litem Haide Rubi Barbosa Altamirano (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendants H&Y Investments, dba H&Y Investments LP; Yu Lian C. Lee; and GPK Group, Inc.

The Complaint alleges causes of action for (1) violation of Civil Code section 1942.4,

(2) tortious breach of the warranty of habitability, (3) private nuisance, (4) Business and Professions Code section 17200, et seq., and (5) negligence.

The parties have reached a settlement in this matter. Haide Rubi Barbosa Altamirano as Petitioner for Claimants Joshua Daniel Orejel and Zoe Bella Salado, and Jose Barbosa Hernandez as Petitioner for Claimant Noah Abel Barbosa (jointly, “Petitioners”), now petition for the Court’s approval of the settlement on behalf of the Claimants.

Discussion

An enforceable settlement of a minor’s claim can only be consummated with court approval. (Prob. Code, § 3500.) The petition must be verified by the petitioner, must contain a full disclosure of all information that has any bearing upon the reasonableness of the compromise, and must be prepared on judicial council form MC-350. (CRC 7.950.)

Each of the petitions are prepared on Form MC-350 and are verified by the Petitioners. However, the Court notes that Item 14 of each of the petitions is blank.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, the Court intends to grant the petitions and approve the compromise, subject to Petitioners correcting the defect identified above, and subject to Plaintiffs’ examination of Petitioners at the hearing.

Petitioners are to give notice of this ruling.

DATED: March 12, 2024 ________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court

[1] The Court notes that the caption on the complaint begins with Plaintiff Jose Barbosa Hernandez; however, it appears that because the Civil Case Cover Sheet filed concurrently with the Complaint identified the second Plaintiff as the lead plaintiff (i.e., Maria Del Altamirano Salinas) rather than Plaintiff Hernandez, the case name in the docket and in the caption of nearly all of the subsequent filings in this case have listed Plaintiff Salinas as the lead Plaintiff rather than Plaintiff Hernandez. To avoid confusion at this late stage, the Court had captioned the case with Plaintiff Salinas as the lead Plaintiff.