STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY VS KENNY MOLINA

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 18STLC10781    Hearing Date: January 26, 2021    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE: Tue., January 26, 2021 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25

CASE NAME: State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Molina

CASE NUMBER: 18STLC10781 COMP. FILED: 08-21-18

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO SET ASIDE DISMISSAL AND FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

RESP. PARTY: None

MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT

(CCP § 664.6)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s Motion to Set Aside Dismissal and to Enter Judgment is GRANTED. Judgment to be entered in the amount of $10,765.67 against Defendant Kenny Molina.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

OPPOSITION: None filed as of January 22, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of January 22, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

1. Background

On August 21, 2018, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) filed an action against Defendant Kenny Molina (“Defendant”). Defendant filed an Answer on October 5, 2018.

On July 22, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Stipulation for Settlement and Order (the “Stipulation”). The Stipulation was signed by Defendant on January 22, 2019, and by Plaintiff’s agent on December 31, 2018. (Id.) Judge James Blancarte signed an order pursuant to the Stipulation on July 22, 2019, stating the Court retained jurisdiction to set aside the dismissal and enforce the Stipulation pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. (Id.)

Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Set Aside Dismissal and for Entry of Judgment (the “Motion”) on September 2, 2020. To date, no opposition has been filed.

1. Legal Standard

Under Code of Civil Procedure, section 664.6:

“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.)

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.) Accordingly, “parties” under section 664.6 means the litigants themselves, not their attorneys. (Levy v. Superior Court (1995) 10 Cal.4th 578, 586 (holding “we conclude that the term ‘parties’ as used in section 664.6 means the litigants themselves, and does not include their attorneys of record.”).) Additionally, the settlement must include the signatures of the parties seeking to enforce the agreement, and against whom enforcement is sought. (J.B.B. Investment Partners, Ltd. v. Fair (2014) 232 Cal.App.4th 974, 985.)

Furthermore,

[R]equests for retention of jurisdiction must be made prior to a dismissal of the suit. Moreover, like the settlement agreement itself, the request must be made orally before the court or in a signed writing, and it must be made by the parties, not by their attorneys, spouses or other such agents. If, after a suit has been dismissed, a party brings a section 664.6 motion for a judgment on a settlement agreement but cannot present to the court a request for retention of jurisdiction that meets all of these requirements, then enforcement of the agreement must be left to a separate lawsuit.

(Wackeen v. Malis (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 429, 433.)

1. Discussion

The Court finds the Stipulation, signed by the parties, to be valid and enforceable under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. The Stipulation provides that Plaintiff would be paid a total of $6,797.60. (7/22/19 Stipulation ¶¶ 2.) Defendant’s insurer would pay $4,797.60 and Defendant would pay the remaining $2,000.00 at a rate of $100.00 per month beginning April 15, 2019 until paid in full. (Id.) It also provides that if Defendant failed to make the required monthly payments, Plaintiff would be entitled to have a judgment entered against him in the amount of $12,634.88 plus interest on that amount from November 7, 2017, costs, and attorney’s fees, minus any payments received. (Id.) Defendant’s insurer made a payment of $4,797.60, but Defendant has not made any payments pursuant to the Stipulation. (Mot., Pillemer Decl., ¶¶ 4-6.)

Plaintiff requests that judgment be entered against Defendant in the amount of $10,765.67. (Id. at ¶ 6.) The amount includes interest of $2,493.39, attorney’s fees of $375.00 based on 1.5 hours of attorney time billed at $250.00 per hour, a filing fee of $60.00, and a credit of $4,797.60 for payments received. (Id.) Plaintiff’s Motion is GRANTED.

1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s Motion to Set Aside Dismissal and to Enter Judgment is GRANTED. Judgment to be entered in the amount of $10,765.67 against Defendant Kenny Molina.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.