Alan Alexis Venegas vs Anthony John Clemens

Case Number

22CV00188

Case Type

Hearing Date / Time

Wed, 11/22/2023 - 10:00

Nature of Proceedings

Minor's Compromise

Tentative Ruling

For Plaintiff Alan Alexis Venegas, a Minor by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, Anahi Hernandez: Robert J. Stoll, III             

For Defendant Anthony John Clemens: Karen M. Harmeling

RULING

For the reasons set forth herein: Plaintiff’s petition for approval of compromise of claim of Alan Alexis Venegas, a minor, is granted. The Court will sign the order submitted by Plaintiff.

Background

By way of judicial council form complaint, filed on January 18, 2022, Plaintiff Alan Alexis Venegas (Venegas), a Minor by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, Anahi Hernandez (Hernandez), alleges: On September 14, 2021, at or near Camino Corto in Isla Vista, Defendant Anthony John Clemens (Clemens) negligently drove his 2013 Volkswagon Passat into Venegas, who was on his bicycle, causing injuries. (Complaint, ¶ GN-1.)

Hernandez, Venegas’ mother, was appointed guardian ad litem on January 19, 2022.

Clemens filed his answer to the complaint on June 10, 2022, asserting a general denial and 10 affirmative defenses.

On September 12, 2023, Venegas filed a notice of conditional settlement of entire case. Plaintiff now moves for approval of the compromise of the action.

Analysis

“The requirements that a guardian ad litem be appointed and that the proposed compromise of a minor’s claim be approved by the trial Court exist to protect the best interests of the minor.” (Pearson v. Superior Court (2012) 202 Cal.App.4^th 1333, 1338.)

“While the guardian ad litem has the power to assent to procedural steps that will facilitate a determination of the ward’s case [citation], the guardian ad litem’s authority is that of “ ‘ “an agent with limited powers.” ’ [Citation.]” [Citation.] For example, when a guardian ad litem believes that settling a case is in the ward’s best interests, that decision requires Court approval. (Code Civ. Proc., 372.) The Court has a duty to ensure that the ward’s rights are protected by the guardian ad litem.” (McClintock v. West (2013) 219 Cal.App.4^th 540, 549.)

“A petition for Court approval of a compromise of, or a covenant not to sue or enforce judgment on, a minor's disputed claim; a compromise or settlement of a pending action or proceeding to which a minor or person with a disability is a party; or the disposition of the proceeds of a judgment for a minor or person with a disability under Probate Code sections 3500 and 3600-3613 or Code of Civil Procedure section 372 must be verified by the Petitioner and must contain a full disclosure of all information that has any bearing on the reasonableness of the compromise, covenant, settlement, or disposition. Except as provided in rule 7.950.5, the petition must be submitted on a completed Petition for Approval of Compromise of Claim or Action or Disposition of Proceeds of Judgment for Minor or Person With a Disability (form MC-350).” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.950.)

“If the Petitioner has been represented or assisted by an attorney in preparing the petition for approval of the compromise of the claim or in any other respect with regard to the claim, the petition must disclose the following information:

“(1) The name, state bar number, law firm, if any, and business address of the attorney;

“(2) Whether the attorney became involved with the petition, directly or indirectly, at the instance of any party against whom the claim is asserted or of any party’s insurance carrier;

“(3) Whether the attorney represents or is employed by any other party or any insurance carrier involved in the matter;

“(4) Whether the attorney has received any attorney’s fees or other compensation for services provided in connection with the claim giving rise to the petition or with the preparation of the petition, and, if so, the amounts and the identity of the person who paid the fees or other compensation;

“(5) If the attorney has not received any attorney’s fees or other compensation for services provided in connection with the claim giving rise to the petition or with the preparation of the petition, whether the attorney expects to receive any fees or other compensation for these services, and, if so, the amounts and the identity of the person who is expected to pay the fees or other compensation; and

“(6) The terms of any agreement between the Petitioner and the attorney.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.951.)

Plaintiff has submitted to following information, on the required judicial council form MC-350 (Petition), signed by Hernandez under penalty of perjury:

Venegas is 15 years old with a date of birth of January 11, 2008. (Petition, ¶ 2.)

On September 14, 2021, on Camino Corto near Estero Road in Isla Vista, Clemens struck Plaintiff with his car. Plaintiff was on his bicycle (Petition, ¶¶ 4, 5.)

Venegas suffered head injuries, left arm and elbow injuries, left foot injuries, and right lower leg and foot injuries. (Petition, ¶ 6.)

Venegas received medical care at the emergency room, podiatrist examinations and treatment and upper extremity examinations and treatment. (Petition, ¶ 7.)

Venegas has recovered completely from the effects of his injuries and there are no permanent injuries. (Petition, ¶ 8.)

The terms of the settlement are that Defendant will pay $100,000.00 in settlement of the claim, and no payments will be made to others for claims arising out of the subject accident. (Petition, ¶¶ 10, 11.)

Venegas’ medical expenses before any reductions total $21,523.49. Of that amount, total medical expenses paid total $2,067.20, reductions total $12,373.09, medical expenses to be paid from settlement proceeds total $9,150.40, and there are liens on the case in the amount of $21,523.49. (Petition, ¶ 12, subd. (a).) Medi-Cal paid $2,067.20, and less the statutory reduction, is to be reimbursed $1,550.40 from the settlement. (Petition, ¶ 12, sud. b(4) & attachment 12b(4)(c).)

Venegas’ medical providers are identified along with their addresses, amounts charged, amounts paid, reductions and amounts to be paid from proceeds of the settlement. (Petition, ¶ 12, subd. b(5)(a) & attachment 12b(5).)

Venegas’ attorneys request that the Court approve $33,333.33 from Venegas’ settlement as attorney fees. (Petitions, ¶ 13, subd. (a).) Venegas’ attorneys claim reasonably incurred costs advanced in the amount of $4,702.00, and request that that amount be reimbursed from the settlement proceeds. (Petition, ¶ 13, subd. (b).)

The net balance of settlement proceeds to be paid to Venegas totals $52,814.27. (Petition, ¶ 15.)

Venegas’ attorneys provide all the information about them that is required by California Rules of Court, rule 7.951. (Petition, ¶ 17.)

Venegas, through his guardian ad litem Hernandez, requests that the balance of his settlement, after the above disbursements, be invested in a structured settlement through Arcadia Settlements Group. (Petitions, ¶ 18, subd. b (3) & Proposed Order, ¶ 8, subd. b (2).)

The Court has reviewed the petition, along with the attachments, and finds the settlement reasonable and in the best interests of the minor. The minor’s compromise will be approved.