Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 23STCV09945, Date: 2025-03-19 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV09945 Hearing Date: March 19, 2025 Dept: 47
Tentative Ruling
Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47
HEARING DATE: March 19, 2025 TRIAL
DATE: NOT SET
CASE: Heidy Rodriguez, et al, v. GHP
Management Corp.
CASE NO.: 23STCV09945 
ETITION
FOR APPROVAL OF COMPROMISE OF MINOR’S CLAIMS
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Heidy Rodriguez, as parent and guardian ad
litem of Itzae Aponte.
RESPONDING PARTY(S): No response on
eCourt as of March 14, 2025
STATEMENT
OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:
This is a habitability action that was filed on May 3, 2023. Plaintiffs,
who are and were tenants at a residential apartment complex, allege that
Defendants permitted the premises to develop extensive uninhabitable conditions
and allowed those conditions to persist.
Plaintiff Heidy Rodriguez, as
parent and guardian ad litem of Itzae Aponte, petitions for approval of a
compromise of the minor’s claims.
TENTATIVE RULING:
The Petition for Approval of
Minors’ Compromise of Claims is GRANTED.
DISCUSSION:
Plaintiff Heidy Rodriguez, as
parent and guardian ad litem of Itzae Aponte (age 4), petitions for approval of
a compromise of the minor’s claims.
Legal Standard
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.)
A petition for court
approval of a compromise or covenant not to sue under Code of Civil Procedure
section 372 must comply with California Rules of Court Rules 7.950, 7.951, and
7.952. The petition must be verified by the petitioner and contain a full
disclosure of all information that has “any bearing upon the reasonableness” of
the compromise or the covenant. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.950.)
The person compromising the claim on behalf of the minor or person who lacks
capacity, and the represented person, must attend the hearing on compromise of
the claim unless the court for good cause dispenses with their personal
appearance. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.952(a).)
An order for deposit of funds of a minor or
person lacking decision-making capacity and a petition for the withdrawal of
such funds must comply with California Rules of Court Rules 7.953 and
7.954. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1384; see also Super. Ct. L.A.
County, Local Rules, rules 4.115-4.118.)
Form MC-350 (Rev. January 1, 2021):
The petition has been verified by
Petitioners and presented on a fully completed mandatory Judicial Council Form
MC-350, using the current January 1, 2021 revision. (Cal. Rule of Court Rule
7.950.)
Settlement:
Plaintiffs are a family of two
adults and one minor child. (Declaration of Heidy Rodriguez ISO Petition ¶ 3.)
Pursuant to the settlement with Defendant, the adult Plaintiffs Heidy Rodriguez
and Jhan Aponte will each receive $27,500 and the minor child will receive $5,000.
(Petition ¶ 10c.)
Attorney’s Fees
The retained attorney’s information
has been disclosed as required by Rule of Court 7.951. (Petition ¶ 17b.) There is an agreement for services provided
in connection with the underlying claim. (Petition ¶ 17a(2).) A copy of the agreement was submitted with
the Petition as strictly required by Rule of Court 7.951(6). (Attach. 17a(2).)
Petitioner’s counsel is not seeking attorney’s fees from the minor claimant.
(See Petition ¶ 16.) The Court therefore need not opine on the reasonableness
of any fee request with respect to the minor’s claim.
Medical Bills:
The minor
claimant has not incurred medical expenses. (Petition ¶ 12.)
//
Costs
No fees or
costs are sought on the minor claimant’s settlement. (Petition ¶ 16.)
Amount to Be Paid to Minor:
The net amount to be paid to the
minor claimant is $5,000. (Petition ¶ 16.)
Court Appearance:
California
Rule of Court 7.952 requires attendance by the petitioner and claimant unless
the court for good cause dispenses with their personal appearance. The Court
finds that the appearance of the claimant Itzae Aponte is not required due to the
minor’s age.
Prognosis:
The minor’s
prognosis is not at issue. (Petition ¶ 8.)
Disposition of Balance of Proceeds:
The
petition requests that the balance of the proceeds be delivered to a parent of
the minor on the terms and conditions specified in Probate Code sections 3401
and 3402. (Petition ¶ 18b.) The petition includes the address to which the
payment is to be directed. (Attach. 18b(5).)
Proposed Order MC-351:
Petitioner
has filed a Proposed Order Form MC-351 for the minor claimant.
Based on the foregoing, the Court
finds the proposed settlement to be fair, reasonable, and in good order.
CONCLUSION:
Accordingly, the Petition for
Approval of Minors’ Compromise of Claims is GRANTED.
Moving
Party to give notice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 19, 2025 ___________________________________
Theresa
M. Traber
Judge
of the Superior Court
Any party may submit on the
tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day
before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It
should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still
conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you
have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you
should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an
order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.