Judge William A. Crowfoot, Case Number: 22AHCV00161, Date: 2023-12-05 Tentative Ruling

Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 22AHCV00161, Date: 2023-12-05 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiffs Alex Lung, John Chang, and Danny Shieh (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) move pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 for an order enforcing a settlement agreement entered into with defendants Sweet and Spicy Life Enterprises, LLC, Avfund Capital Group, Inc., The Avfund Group, Inc., and Raul Avila (collectively, “Defendants”). Plaintiffs request the Court enter judgment against Defendants in the principal amount of $93,500 and an award of attorney fees and costs as set forth in the settlement agreement attached as Exhibit A (the “Settlement Agreement”). The motion is unopposed. Plaintiffs previously filed a motion to enforce this Settlement Agreement but the motion was denied; in this renewed motion, Plaintiffs have brought a provision of the Settlement Agreement to the Court’s attention, section 20, which was neither mentioned by Plaintiff nor considered by the Court in connection with the earlier motion. The Court is persuaded that it results in a different conclusion.

“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 requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 664.6.) In hearing a section 664.6 motion, the trial court may receive evidence, determine disputed facts, and enter terms of a settlement agreement as a judgment. (Bowers v. Raymond J. Lucia Companies, Inc. (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 724, 732.) The court may interpret the terms and conditions to settlement (Fiore v. Alvord (1985) 182 Cal.App.3d 561, 566), but the court may not create material terms of a settlement, as opposed to deciding what terms the parties themselves have previously agreed upon (Weddington Productions, Inc. v. Flick (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 793, 810). Strict compliance with the statutory requirements is necessary before a court can enforce a settlement agreement under this statute. (Sully-Miller Contracting Co. v. Gledson/Cashman Construction, Inc. (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 30, 37.)

As set forth in the Settlement Agreement, the parties agreed that Defendants would make monthly payments beginning on August 15, 2022, and ending on September 30, 2023. Payments would be made payable to The Law Offices of Fang Chen – Client Trust Account. (Ex. A, § 4(d).) The parties also agreed that the Settlement Agreement “may be used as evidence” pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. (Ex. A, § 20.) This provision indicates that the parties intended for the Court to retain jurisdiction to enforce this settlement and enter its terms as a judgment.

Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED and judgment shall be entered against Defendants for $93,500 as the principal sum. To the extent that Plaintiffs believe that they are entitled to prejudgment interest pursuant to Civil Code section 3289, and attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to section 13(b) of the Settlement Agreement, Plaintiffs shall submit a proposed judgment identifying the amounts for each item requested and the method of calculation.

William A. Crowfoot

Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at ALHDEPT3@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.