This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/03/2019 at 04:34:33 (UTC).

MEL LEWIS ET AL VS JENNIE D SCHUENEMAN

Case Summary

On 02/15/2017 MEL LEWIS filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against JENNIE D SCHUENEMAN. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is AMY D. HOGUE. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****0600

  • Filing Date:

    02/15/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

AMY D. HOGUE

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

CUMMINGS JACQULYNE

ROZIER CORNELLA

ESTIS SHANICE

LEWIS MEL

Defendants and Respondents

SCHUENEMAN JENNIE D.

DOES 1 TO 20

LEWIS JANNA

ESTATE OF EARL JACKSON

Plaintiff and Guardian Ad Litem

LEWIS MEL

Minor

LEWIS ZION

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff, Petitioner and Minor Attorneys

DORENFELD DAVID K. ESQ.

DORENFELD DAVID K.

Defendant Attorney

SAFARIAN HARRY A.

 

Court Documents

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

5/15/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT

6/19/2018: DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT

Motion to Vacate

10/17/2018: Motion to Vacate

Minute Order

12/14/2018: Minute Order

Minute Order

12/14/2018: Minute Order

Unknown

12/14/2018: Unknown

Unknown

12/14/2018: Unknown

Order

12/14/2018: Order

Notice of Ruling

12/18/2018: Notice of Ruling

Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

1/8/2019: Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

Notice

2/14/2019: Notice

Unknown

3/4/2019: Unknown

Stipulation to Continue Trial/FSC [and Related Motion/Discovery Dates] Personal Injury Courts Only (Department 91, 92, 93, 97)

3/12/2019: Stipulation to Continue Trial/FSC [and Related Motion/Discovery Dates] Personal Injury Courts Only (Department 91, 92, 93, 97)

Stipulation to Continue Trial/FSC [and Related Motion/Discovery Dates] Personal Injury Courts Only (Department 91, 92, 93, 97)

3/28/2019: Stipulation to Continue Trial/FSC [and Related Motion/Discovery Dates] Personal Injury Courts Only (Department 91, 92, 93, 97)

Proof of Personal Service

5/13/2019: Proof of Personal Service

APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN ETC.

2/15/2017: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN ETC.

COMPLAINT 1) NEGLIGENT MAINTENANCE OF PREM ISES;ETC

2/15/2017: COMPLAINT 1) NEGLIGENT MAINTENANCE OF PREM ISES;ETC

SUMMONS

3/7/2017: SUMMONS

12 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/21/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 7, Amy D. Hogue, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/20/2019
  • at 08:35 AM in Department 34; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/13/2019
  • Proof of Personal Service; Filed by Jacqulyne Cummings (Plaintiff); Shanice Estis (Plaintiff); Mel Lewis (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/13/2019
  • Proof of Personal Service; Filed by Jacqulyne Cummings (Plaintiff); Shanice Estis (Plaintiff); Mel Lewis (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/07/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 7, Amy D. Hogue, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/07/2019
  • at 09:00 AM in Department 34; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/28/2019
  • [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Personal Injury Courts Only (Central District); Filed by Jacqulyne Cummings (Plaintiff); Shanice Estis (Plaintiff); Mel Lewis (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/12/2019
  • [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Personal Injury Courts Only (Central District); Filed by Jacqulyne Cummings (Plaintiff); Shanice Estis (Plaintiff); Mel Lewis (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/04/2019
  • Clerk of Court Notice of Clerical Error and Correction; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/14/2019
  • Notice (of Case Reassignment); Filed by Jacqulyne Cummings (Plaintiff); Shanice Estis (Plaintiff); Mel Lewis (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
22 More Docket Entries
  • 05/15/2018
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/15/2018
  • Proof-Service/Summons

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2017
  • Summons; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2017
  • Summons Issued; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/27/2017
  • Ord Apptng Guardian Ad Litem; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2017
  • COMPLAINT 1) NEGLIGENT MAINTENANCE OF PREM ISES;ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2017
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN ETC.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by Jacqulyne Cummings (Plaintiff); Shanice Estis (Plaintiff); Cornella Rozier (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2017
  • Application ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC650600    Hearing Date: November 18, 2019    Dept: 34

SUBJECT: Petition to Approve Minor’s Compromise

Moving Party: Plaintiff Shanice Estis

Resp. Party: None

The petition to confirm minor’s compromise is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND:

On February 15, 2017, Plaintiffs Mel Lewis, Cornelia Rozier, Shanice Estis, Zion Lewis, and Jacqulyne Cummings commenced this action against Jennie D. Schueneman for (1) negligent maintenance of premises; (2) nuisance; (3) breach of warranty of habitability, breach of covenant of quiet enjoyment; (5) negligent violations of statutory and legal duties; and (6) intentional violations of statutory and legal duties.

“This lawsuit involves Plaintiffs’ claims arising out of their tenancy at an apartment building located at 1842 1/2 S. Gramercy Place, Los Angeles, California 90019 (‘the Property’), which was owned/managed by Defendant. During Plaintiffs’ tenancy, the Property was unsafe, uninhabitable, in a state of disrepair, and in violation of building, health and safety laws. Defendant further demolished the garages at the Property, without notice, thereby destroying Plaintiffs’ personal property items.” (Petition, p. 2, ¶ 6.)

On June 21, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a request for dismissal as to the fourth and fifth causes of action in the complaint.

On January 8, 2019, Plaintiff filed an amendment to the complaint, substituting DOE 1 for Estate of Earl Jackson and DOE 2 for Janna Lewis, as Executor of the Estate of Earl Jackson.

On June 26, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a notice of settlement.

On October 18, 2019, Petitioner Shanice Estis, on behalf of Claimant Zion Lewis, filed the instant petition to approve minor’s compromise.

ANALYSIS:

A. Relevant Law

The petitions to approve minors or individuals with disabilities’ compromises are governed by California Rules of Court, Rules 7.950, et seq. and Probate Code sections 3500 and 3600 et seq. If an action is pending and settlement is effected prior to trial, the person with a disability’s compromise must be approved by the court. (Code Civ. Proc., § 372.)

California Rules of Court, rule 7.950 provides: “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 disposition of the proceeds of a judgment for a minor or person with a disability under chapter 4 of part 8 of division 4 of the Probate Code (commencing with section 3600) 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 upon the reasonableness of the compromise, covenant, settlement, or disposition. Except as provided in rule 7.950.5, the petition must be prepared on a fully completed Petition to Approve Compromise of Disputed Claim or Pending Action or Disposition of Proceeds of Judgment for Minor or Person With a Disability (form MC-350).”

Probate Code section 3601 provides:

(a) The court making the order or giving the judgment referred to in Section 3600, as a part thereof, shall make a further order authorizing and directing that reasonable expenses, medical or otherwise and including reimbursement to a parent, guardian, or conservator, costs, and attorney's fees, as the court shall approve and allow therein, shall be paid from the money or other property to be paid or delivered for the benefit of the minor or person with a disability.

(b) The order required by subdivision (a) may be directed to the following:

(1) A parent of the minor, the guardian ad litem, or the guardian of the estate of the minor or the conservator of the estate of the person with a disability.

(2) The payer of any money to be paid pursuant to the compromise, covenant, or judgment for the benefit of the minor or person with a disability.”

Probate Code section 3602(b) provides:

Except as provided in subdivisions (c) and (d), if there is a guardianship of the estate of the minor or conservatorship of the estate of the person with a disability, the remaining balance of the money and other property, after payment of all expenses, costs, and fees as approved and allowed by the court under Section 3601, shall be paid or delivered to the guardian or conservator of the estate. Upon application of the guardian or conservator, the court making the order or giving the judgment referred to in Section 3600 or the court in which the guardianship or conservatorship proceeding is pending may, with or without notice, make an order that all or part of the money paid or to be paid to the guardian or conservator under this subdivision be deposited or invested as provided in Section 2456.

Attorney's fees for services to a minor or person with a disability are governed by California Rules of Court, rule 7.955 and use a “reasonable fee” standard. California Rules of Court, rule 7.955(a) states that, unless the Court approved the fee arrangement in advance, the Court must use a reasonable fee standard when approving and allowing the amount of attorney's fees payable from money or property paid or to be paid for the benefit of a person with a disability.  The Court must give consideration to the terms of any representation agreement made between the attorney and the representative of the person with a disability and must evaluate the agreement based on the facts and circumstances existing at the time the agreement was made. Further, rule 7.955(c) requires the attorney to submit a declaration that addresses the following non-exclusive factors:

1) The fact that a minor or person with a disability is involved and the circumstances of that minor or person with a disability.

2) The amount of the fee in proportion to the value of the services performed.

3) The novelty and difficulty of the questions involved and the skill required to perform the legal services properly.

4) The amount involved and the results obtained.

5) The time limitations or constraints imposed by the representative of the minor or person with a disability or by the circumstances.

6) The nature and length of the professional relationship between the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability.

7) The experience, reputation, and ability of the attorney or attorneys performing the legal services.

8) The time and labor required.

9) The informed consent of the representative of the minor or person with a disability to the fee.

10) The relative sophistication of the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability.

11) The likelihood, if apparent to the representative of the minor or person with a disability when the representation agreement was made, that the attorney's acceptance of the particular employment would preclude other employment.

12) Whether the fee is fixed, hourly, or contingent.

13) If the fee is contingent:

a. The risk of loss borne by the attorney;

b. The amount of costs advanced by the attorney; and

c. The delay in payment of fees and reimbursement of costs paid by the attorney.

14) Statutory requirements for representation agreements applicable to particular cases or claims.

B. Discussion

Claimant Zion Lewis, by and through his Guardian ad Litem and Parent, Petitioner Shanice Estis, filed this petition to approve minor’s compromise of disputed claim. (Petition, p. 1.)

Claimant is to receive $1,500.00 from Defendant to settle his claims. (Petition, p. 3, ¶11.) The other Plaintiffs have agreed to settle their claims with Defendant in the total amount of $16,500.00. (Petition, p. 4, ¶12(b).) The settlement payments are to be apportioned and distributed as follows:

· Mel Lewis - $7,000.00

· Shanice Estis - $1,500.00

· Cornelia Rozier - $3,500.00

· Jacqulyne Cummings - $4,500.00 (Petition, p. 4, ¶12(b)(5)

For Zion Lewis, the net balance of proceeds totals $992.41. (Petition, p. 6, ¶ 15.) His share of the attorney’s costs incurred during litigation is $507.59. (Petition, p. 6, ¶14(b).) The settlement amount of $1,500 minus the attorney’s costs of $507.59 equals $992.41. (Petition, p. 6, ¶17(f).)

Petitioner requests that the settlement balance of $992.41 be paid or delivered to the parent of the minor, upon the terms and under the conditions specified in Probate Code sections 3401-3402, without bond. (Petition, p. 9, ¶19(b)(5).)

Plaintiffs’ counsel declares that the amount of $1,500.00 is a favorable outcome because “the Claimant did not suffer any physical injury at all; rather, the only damages alleged were property damages and most of those damages belong to the adult Plaintiffs as opposed to the Claimant.” (Margolin Decl., ¶ 4.) Plaintiffs’ counsel asserts that all Plaintiffs have consented to equally split the costs of $2,537.98 advanced by their counsel and each Plaintiff will pay for 1/5 of the costs out of their gross settlement recovery. (Margolin Decl., ¶ 5.) Plaintiffs’ counsel declares that he has waived the attorney’s fees for the Claimant. (Margolin Decl., ¶ 5.)

After a review of Plaintiffs’ counsel’s declaration and the accompanying petition, the Court finds the settlement amount is fair and reasonable. The Court GRANTS the petition and approves minor’s compromise of the claims for Zion Lewis.

Case Number: BC650600    Hearing Date: October 29, 2019    Dept: 34

SUBJECT: Petition to Approve Minor’s Compromise

Moving Party: Plaintiff Shanice Estis

Resp. Party: None

The petition to confirm minor’s compromise is DENIED.

BACKGROUND:

On February 15, 2017, Plaintiffs Mel Lewis, Cornelia Rozier, Shanice Estis, Zion Lewis, and Jacqulyne Cummings commenced this action against Jennie D. Schueneman for (1) negligent maintenance of premises; (2) nuisance; (3) breach of warranty of habitability, breach of covenant of quiet enjoyment; (5) negligent violations of statutory and legal duties; and (6) intentional violations of statutory and legal duties.

“This lawsuit involves Plaintiffs’ claims arising out of their tenancy at an apartment building located at 1842 1/2 S. Gramercy Place, Los Angeles, California 90019 (‘the Property’), which was owned/managed by Defendant. During Plaintiffs’ tenancy, the Property was unsafe, uninhabitable, in a state of disrepair, and in violation of building, health and safety laws. Defendant further demolished the garages at the Property, without notice, thereby destroying Plaintiffs’ personal property items.” (Petition, p. 2, ¶ 6.)

On June 21, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a request for dismissal as to the fourth and fifth causes of action in the complaint.

On January 8, 2019, Plaintiff filed an amendment to the complaint, substituting DOE 1 for Estate of Earl Jackson and DOE 2 for Janna Lewis, as Executor of the Estate of Earl Jackson.

On June 26, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a notice of settlement.

On October 18, 2019, Petitioner Shanice Estis, on behalf of Claimant Zion Lewis, filed the instant petition to approve minor’s compromise.

ANALYSIS:

A. Relevant Law

The petitions to approve minors or individuals with disabilities’ compromises are governed by California Rules of Court, Rules 7.950, et seq. and Probate Code sections 3500 and 3600 et seq. If an action is pending and settlement is effected prior to trial, the person with a disability’s compromise must be approved by the court. (Code Civ. Proc., § 372.)

California Rules of Court, rule 7.950 provides: “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 disposition of the proceeds of a judgment for a minor or person with a disability under chapter 4 of part 8 of division 4 of the Probate Code (commencing with section 3600) 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 upon the reasonableness of the compromise, covenant, settlement, or disposition. Except as provided in rule 7.950.5, the petition must be prepared on a fully completed Petition to Approve Compromise of Disputed Claim or Pending Action or Disposition of Proceeds of Judgment for Minor or Person With a Disability (form MC-350).”

Probate Code section 3601 provides:

(a) The court making the order or giving the judgment referred to in Section 3600, as a part thereof, shall make a further order authorizing and directing that reasonable expenses, medical or otherwise and including reimbursement to a parent, guardian, or conservator, costs, and attorney's fees, as the court shall approve and allow therein, shall be paid from the money or other property to be paid or delivered for the benefit of the minor or person with a disability.

(b) The order required by subdivision (a) may be directed to the following:

(1) A parent of the minor, the guardian ad litem, or the guardian of the estate of the minor or the conservator of the estate of the person with a disability.

(2) The payer of any money to be paid pursuant to the compromise, covenant, or judgment for the benefit of the minor or person with a disability.”

Probate Code section 3602(b) provides:

Except as provided in subdivisions (c) and (d), if there is a guardianship of the estate of the minor or conservatorship of the estate of the person with a disability, the remaining balance of the money and other property, after payment of all expenses, costs, and fees as approved and allowed by the court under Section 3601, shall be paid or delivered to the guardian or conservator of the estate. Upon application of the guardian or conservator, the court making the order or giving the judgment referred to in Section 3600 or the court in which the guardianship or conservatorship proceeding is pending may, with or without notice, make an order that all or part of the money paid or to be paid to the guardian or conservator under this subdivision be deposited or invested as provided in Section 2456.

Attorney's fees for services to a minor or person with a disability are governed by California Rules of Court, rule 7.955 and use a “reasonable fee” standard. California Rules of Court, rule 7.955(a) states that, unless the Court approved the fee arrangement in advance, the Court must use a reasonable fee standard when approving and allowing the amount of attorney's fees payable from money or property paid or to be paid for the benefit of a person with a disability.  The Court must give consideration to the terms of any representation agreement made between the attorney and the representative of the person with a disability and must evaluate the agreement based on the facts and circumstances existing at the time the agreement was made. Further, rule 7.955(c) requires the attorney to submit a declaration that addresses the following non-exclusive factors:

1) The fact that a minor or person with a disability is involved and the circumstances of that minor or person with a disability.

2) The amount of the fee in proportion to the value of the services performed.

3) The novelty and difficulty of the questions involved and the skill required to perform the legal services properly.

4) The amount involved and the results obtained.

5) The time limitations or constraints imposed by the representative of the minor or person with a disability or by the circumstances.

6) The nature and length of the professional relationship between the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability.

7) The experience, reputation, and ability of the attorney or attorneys performing the legal services.

8) The time and labor required.

9) The informed consent of the representative of the minor or person with a disability to the fee.

10) The relative sophistication of the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability.

11) The likelihood, if apparent to the representative of the minor or person with a disability when the representation agreement was made, that the attorney's acceptance of the particular employment would preclude other employment.

12) Whether the fee is fixed, hourly, or contingent.

13) If the fee is contingent:

a. The risk of loss borne by the attorney;

b. The amount of costs advanced by the attorney; and

c. The delay in payment of fees and reimbursement of costs paid by the attorney.

14) Statutory requirements for representation agreements applicable to particular cases or claims.

B. Discussion

Claimant Zion Lewis, by and through his Guardian ad Litem and Parent, Petitioner Shanice Estis, filed this petition to approve minor’s compromise of disputed claim. (Petition, p. 1.)

Claimant is to receive $1,500.00 from Defendant to settle his claims. (Petition, p. 3, ¶11.) The other Plaintiffs have agreed to settle their claims with Defendant in the total amount of $16,500.00. (Petition, p. 4, ¶12(b).) The settlement payments are to be apportioned and distributed as follows:

· Mel Lewis - $7,000.00

· Shanice Estis - $1,500.00

· Cornelia Rozier - $3,500.00

· Jacqulyne Cummings - $4,500.00 (Petition, p. 4, ¶12(b)(5)

For Zion Lewis, the net balance of proceeds totals $992.41. (Petition, p. 6, ¶ 15.) His share of the attorney’s costs incurred during litigation is $507.59. (Petition, p. 6, ¶14(b).) The settlement amount of $1,500.00 minus the attorney’s costs of $507.59, which equals $992.41. (Petition, p. 6, ¶17(f).)

Petitioner requests that the settlement balance of $992.41 be paid or delivered to the parent of the minor, upon the terms and under the conditions specified in Probate Code sections 3401-3402, without bond. (Petition, p. 9, ¶19(b)(5).)

Plaintiffs’ attorney does not submit a declaration as required by California Rules of Court, Rule 7.955(c). The Court is unable to approve this petition for minor’s compromise without reviewing the attorney declaration. Accordingly, the Court DENIES the petition to approve minor’s compromise.