Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 19STCV41959, Date: 2022-08-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV41959    Hearing Date: August 19, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

          On November 19, 2019, Plaintiff Mohammad Tayari (“Plaintiff”) filed this action for negligence against Defendants Stephen Kenn, LLC; Paul Michael Montoya (“Montoya”); and Baur Miroslav.

          On January 28, 2021, Defendant/Cross-Complainant Montoya filed a cross-complaint against Defendants/Cross-Defendants Stephen Kenn, LLC and Baur Miroslav for indemnification and apportionment of fault.

          On June 16, 2022, Defendants/Cross-Defendants Stephen Kenn, LLC and Miroslav Bauer (erroneously sued as Baur Miroslav) (“Bauer”) (collectively “Moving Defendants”) filed this motion for determination of good faith settlement.  No opposition has been filed.

          The Court must approve any settlement entered into by less than all joint tortfeasors or co-obligors.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 877.6.)  This requirement furthers two sometimes-competing policies: (1) the equitable sharing of costs among the parties at fault, and (2) the encouragement of settlements.  (Erreca’s v. Superior Court (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 1475, 1487.)  If the settlement is made in good faith, the Court “shall bar any other joint tortfeasor or co-obligor from any further claims against the settling tortfeasor . . . for equitable comparative contribution, or partial or comparative indemnity, based on comparative negligence or comparative fault.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 877.6, subd. (c).)

          “When no one objects, the barebones motion which sets forth the ground for good faith, accompanied by a declaration which sets forth a brief background of the case is sufficient” for the Court to grant a motion for determination of good faith settlement.  (City of Grand Terrace v. Superior Court (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 1257, 1261.)

          This case arises out of a three-car collision on June 24, 2018.  Defendant Bauer’s vehicle, which was owned by Defendant Stephen Kenn, LLC, collided with Defendant Montoya’s vehicle, which in turn collided with Plaintiff’s vehicle.  Moving Defendants’ counsel states that the parties participated in mediation with mediator Floyd J. Siegal (“Siegal”) of Judicate West on April 22, 2022.  While the matter did not settle at mediation, settlement negotiations continued with the assistance of Siegal.  Moving Defendants served Plaintiff with a 998 offer in the amount of $375,000 on April 27, 2022.  On May 3, 2022, Plaintiff served Moving Defendants with a 998 offer in the amount of $475,000.  With the help of Siegal, the parties reached a settlement for Moving Defendants to pay Plaintiff $425,000 in exchange for dismissal of Moving Defendants from this action.  Moving Defendants provide that, while Plaintiff claimed medical expenses of approximately $153,000, their expert valued Plaintiff’s actual medical expenses at closer to $121,000.  Moving Defendants also provide that Plaintiff claimed future medical costs of over $160,000 based on the need for knee and back surgery and lost earnings of approximately $30,000 to $35,000, making the $425,000 well within the ball park.  Moving Defendants’ counsel declares that the settlement came about through arm’s length negotiations and genuine mediation efforts between the parties with the help of Siegal. 

          The Court finds Moving Defendants have presented sufficient information demonstrating the settlement was made in good faith.  No opposition has been filed contending otherwise.

          Based on the foregoing, Defendants Stephen Kenn, LLC and Miroslav Bauer’s motion for determination of good faith settlement is GRANTED.

          The settlement between Defendants Stephen Kenn, LLC and Miroslav Bauer and Plaintiff Mohammad Tayari is a good faith settlement pursuant to CCP section 877.6.  All claims against the settling parties for equitable comparative contribute, or partial or comparative indemnity, based on comparative negligence or comparative fault, are barred pursuant to CCP section 877.6(c).

Moving party to give notice. 

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.