On 08/18/2017 MARIA SERRATO filed a Personal Injury - Uninsured Motor Vehicle lawsuit against INMAR D RIVAS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is LAURA A. SEIGLE. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
LAURA A. SEIGLE
DOES 1 TO 20
RIVAS INMAR D.
RUBIN JAY T.
LOPEZ ROGER W. ESQ.
9/13/2018: Notice of Lien
1/2/2019: Stipulation and Order
8/18/2017: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM
at 08:30 AM in Department 4B, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - StipulationRead MoreRead Less
at 10:00 AM in Department 4B, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - StipulationRead MoreRead Less
Stipulation and Order ([Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC [and related motions/discovery dates]); Filed by INMAR D. RIVAS (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Summons (on Cross Complaint); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Cross-Complaint; Filed by INMAR D. RIVAS (Cross-Complainant)Read MoreRead Less
Answer; Filed by INMAR D. RIVAS (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Notice of Lien; Filed by MARIA SERRATO (Legacy Party)Read MoreRead Less
Notice of LienRead MoreRead Less
SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
Ord Apptng Guardian Ad Litem; Filed by Plaintiff/PetitionerRead MoreRead Less
COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)Read MoreRead Less
APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEMRead MoreRead Less
Application ; Filed by Plaintiff/PetitionerRead MoreRead Less
Complaint; Filed by nullRead MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC672965 Hearing Date: January 08, 2021 Dept: 27
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT
MARIA SERRATO, et al.,
INMAR D. RIVAS,
) ) ) )
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PETITION TO APPROVE MINOR’S COMPROMISE
January 8, 2021
Claimant Jonathon Hernandez Serrato (“Claimant”), a minor, by and through his parent, Maria Serrato (“Petitioner”), has agreed to settle his claims against Defendant Inmar Rivas in exchange for $7,500. If approved, $6,142 will be used for medical expenses, $0 will be used for attorney’s fees, and $3,885 will be used for non-medical expenses, leaving a balance of $1,358.00 to be delivered to Petitioner upon the terms and under the conditions specified in Probate Code section 3401-3402, without bond. Petitioner and Claimant’s former attorney, Omid Khorshidi, filed a notice of attorney’s lien for fees and requests $1,689.71 for fees and costs.
Court approval is required for all settlements of a minor’s claim. (Probate Code §§ 3500, 3600, et seq.; Code Civ. Proc. § 372.) The Petition is defective. The full breakdown of the settlement is not reflected consistently throughout the Petition. The costs that counsel wishes to be reimbursed for include treatment with Vargo P.T. ($1,890), Jeffrey Kantor, M.D. ($682.50), S. Bay Pain Doctors ($472.50), and Advanced Imaging ($840). There is no explanation why these are listed as expenses incurred by counsel in Item 14 instead of Item 13, especially considering that the Order requests that the amounts be disbursed directly to these providers. Also, Item 13a(2) identifies $6,142.50 in medical expenses to be paid, only states that $2,257.50 need to be reimbursed without proof of a negotiated reduction of $4,338.50. Also, there is no evidence supporting any of the expenses listed in Item 13 or 14 such as statements or bills.
As for Mr. Khorshidi’s lien, there is no evidence that Petitioner entered into a fee agreement with him. Accordingly, the Court declines to award any fees or expenses in connection with this matter to his office.
Lastly, Petitioner wishes to have the settlement funds released to her without any restriction. In connection with any amended petition, Petitioner should be prepared to testify in court concerning her plans for the proceeds of the settlement.
The unopposed Petition to approve minor’s compromise is DENIED without prejudice.
Per California Rules of Court, Rule 7.952, Petitioner and Claimant must appear at the January 8, 2021 hearing, unless the Court finds good cause to excuse their appearance. The Court finds that Claimant’s appearance is not necessary, but will require Petitioner to appear.
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.
Dated this 8th day of January 2021
Hon. Edward B. Moreton, Jr.
Judge of the Superior Court
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases