What is a Notice of Settlement?

Notice of Settlement

CRC Rule 3.1385(a) requires plaintiff to immediately file and serve a written notice of settlement.

Motion to Vacate Notice of Settlement

Plaintiff may contend that no legally binding agreement exists to settle her claim, and that this is sufficient to set aside the notice of settlement. (Irvine v. Regents of the University of California (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 994, 1001-02 (“By alleging a dispute over whether the parties reached a binding settlement, plaintiff demonstrated good cause to restore the case to the civil active list.”).)

Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 473, subdivision (b), “[t]he court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” However, the application for relief must be made “within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, dismissal, order, or proceeding was taken.” (Code of Civil Procedure § 473(b); see also, Cruz v. Fagor America, Inc. (2006) 146 Cal.App.4th 488, 495 (relief under Section 473(b) is proper only if the moving party establishes proper grounds for relief and the motion is made within the applicable time limits).) section 473(b) “was never intended to be a ‘catch-all remedy for every case of poor judgment on the part of counsel which results in dismissal.’ [Citation.].” (Gotschall v. Daley (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 479, 483.) “Courts have limited the application of the mandatory provision to those dismissals procedurally equivalent to defaults.” (Id.)

California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1385, requires a plaintiff to notify the court immediately upon settlement of the case. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1385(a)(1).) Where a settlement is conditional, the party giving notice must specify the date by which a dismissal is to be filed. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1385(c).)

“If the settlement agreement conditions dismissal of the entire case on the satisfactory completion of specified terms that are not to be performed within 45 days of the settlement, including payment in installment payments, the notice of conditional settlement served and filed by each plaintiff or other party seeking affirmative relief must specify the date by which the dismissal is to be filed.” (CRC 3.1385(c)(1).) “The only decision before the court at a rule 3.1385 hearing is whether to dismiss the case or restore it to the civil active list.” (Irvine v. Regents of University of California (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 994, 1001.) If the party required to file a request for dismissal fails to do so within 45 days after the dismissal date in the notice, the court must dismiss the entire case unless good cause is shown why the case should not be dismissed. (Rule 3.1385(b), (c)(2).)

Sanctions

Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7 may be invoked for the wrongful filing of the notice of settlement. In determining the amount of the sanctions, sanctions “shall be limited to what is sufficient to deter repetition of this conduct or comparable conduct by others similarly situated.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 128.7, subd. (d).)

Useful Rulings on Notice of Settlement

Recent Rulings on Notice of Settlement

JOSE M IBARRA VS BAKER COMMODITIES, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION

On April 28, 2020, the parties filed a Joint Notice of Settlement. On June 12, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant motion. On June 16, 2020, Baker filed a Joinder to the motion. The parties now seek approval of the settlement under California Labor Code section 2699(l)(2). Legal Standard The PAGA is “a procedural statute allowing an aggrieved employee to recover civil penalties—for Labor Code violations—that otherwise would be sought by state labor law enforcement agencies.”

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

TANYA CRUZ VS SKATELAND ENTERPRISES INC

Skateland Enterprises: 9-18-2020: A notice of settlement was filed on 9-16-2020 such that the court assumes the motions set for 9-22-2020 are moot and taken off calendar.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

MORALES VS. TORRES GENERAL, INC.

Motion to Strike OFF CALENDAR NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT FILED 7/22/20

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

DANIEL MARTINEZ VS C & P TRADING, INC., ET AL.

On July 30, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement. On August 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for attorneys’ fees and memorandum of costs, seeking $97,465.50 in attorneys’ fees and $3,179.03 in costs. ANALYSIS: I. Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs A. Request for Judicial Notice Plaintiff requests that the Court take judicial notice of the following documents: · Attachment 1: California State Bar, Attorney Licensee Profile for attorney Sylvia V.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

PEREZ VS. SUMMIT INTERCONNECT, INC.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Approve PAGA Settlement is granted, except, however, plaintiff must correct the Notice of Settlement to be sent to the aggrieved employees, and in the second paragraph, on line 4, change “Defendant have” to “Defendant has”. In addition, the court will approve attorneys’ fees to plaintiff’s attorneys only in the amount of $178,500, which represents 30% of the gross settlement amount.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

DANIEL MARTINEZ VS C & P TRADING, INC., ET AL.

On July 30, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement. On August 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for attorneys’ fees and memorandum of costs, seeking $97,465.50 in attorneys’ fees and $3,179.03 in costs. ANALYSIS: I. Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs A. Request for Judicial Notice Plaintiff requests that the Court take judicial notice of the following documents: · Attachment 1: California State Bar, Attorney Licensee Profile for attorney Sylvia V.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

OVERCAST VS HORNBLOWER GROUP INC [E-FILE]

The court orders Plaintiff's counsel to revise the proposed order, to include a provision for allocation of $10,000.00 to Plaintiff Kenneth Overcast, and to include a copy of the Notice of Settlement as an exhibit to the order, and submit the revised proposed order to the court within 10 days of this ruling.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

EPIFANIO ROMAN VS GENERAL MOTORS LLC

On May 27, 2020, Roman filed a Notice of Settlement of Entire Case, conditional, with a request for dismissal to be filed no later than October 26, 2020. On August 21, 2020, Roman filed the instant Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Costs and Expenses, along with a Memorandum of Costs. On September 3, 2020, GM filed an Opposition. On September 10, 2020, Roman filed a Reply.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

OVERCAST VS HORNBLOWER GROUP INC [E-FILE]

The court orders Plaintiff's counsel to revise the proposed order, to include a provision for allocation of $10,000.00 to Plaintiff Kenneth Overcast, and to include a copy of the Notice of Settlement as an exhibit to the order, and submit the revised proposed order to the court within 10 days of this ruling.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

OSCAR GARCIA VS GENERAL MOTORS LLC

Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement of entire case on October 16, 2019. Plaintiff now moves for attorney’s fees in the amount of $67,285.67 (based on a lodestar of $41,200.00 and a 0.5 fee enhancement) and costs in the amount of $5,485.67. Defendant opposes the motion in-part. Discussion I. Motion for Attorney’s Fees A.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY VS KHRISTINE JAZMINE POYORENA

Following a continuance of the trial date, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement on August 29, 2019. Plaintiff then filed a dismissal of the entire action with prejudice on December 5, 2019. Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Vacate Dismissal on June 5, 2020. To date, no opposition has been filed. Discussion Plaintiff seeks relief from the dismissal entered on December 5, 2019 pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure, section 473, subdivision (b).

  • Hearing

    Sep 16, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

WILLIAM GLAD VS HONG WASH LLC ET AL

On 3/04/20, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement with Benny Hong. The Notice of Settlement indicated an intent to dismiss Hong by 4/17/20. On 3/05/20, the Court scheduled an OSC re: dismissal for 4/08/20. Because of the pandemic, the OSC was continued to 7/10/20. On 7/10/20, Plaintiff appeared and requested additional time to complete the settlement. There is an OSC re: dismissal due to settlement as to Benny Hong on calendar contemporaneously with today’s motion hearings.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Following a continuance of the trial date, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement on September 18, 2019. At the Order to Show Cause re Dismissal (Settlement) the next day, the Court noted the Notice of Settlement was filed and continued the Order to Show Cause to January 22, 2020. (Order, 9/19/19.) The Court further instructed that a request for dismissal was to be filed in the clerk’s office at least five court days before the Order to Show Cause in order to avoid a mandatory appearance.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

WVBAGD, LLC VS GREG GALLETLY, ET AL.

On October 25, 2019, plaintiffs filed a Notice of Settlement of Entire Case. On November 7, 2020, plaintiffs filed a request of dismissal of the entire action with prejudice, which was entered as requested the same date. ANALYSIS: CCP § 664.6 provides, in pertinent part: “If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside the presence of the court...for settlement of the case,...the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

KAREN R. AVILES VS FCA US LLC

With respect to plaintiff’s motion requesting leave to amend her complaint on October 10, 2019, the Court expressed concern that it came after the discovery cut-off date and less than three weeks prior to the November 4, 2019 trial date (see 6/22/20 Minute Order), which the Court notes was vacated subsequently only because plaintiff had filed a Notice of Settlement on October 18, 2019.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

CHANCE ARMSTRONG ET AL VS GMRI INC ET AL

Medical records 544.70 Service fee 435.00 Filing fee 435.00 Transportation fee 522.71 Independent Medical Examination 1,000.00 Substitution of Attorney 6.75 Videographer for deposition 85.00 Defense Medical Examination 2,400.00 Deposition fee 1691.65 Notice of Settlement Filing fee 6.75 Court Reporter 994.50 Total $8,122.06 The Court approves the following distribution: Attorney’s fees (25%) $37,000.00 Medical expenses 2,871.05 Costs (reduced) 8,122.06 Total fees and costs $47,993.11

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2020

CHANCE ARMSTRONG ET AL VS GMRI INC ET AL

Medical records 544.70 Service fee 435.00 Filing fee 435.00 Transportation fee 522.71 Independent Medical Examination 1,000.00 Substitution of Attorney 6.75 Videographer for deposition 85.00 Defense Medical Examination 2,400.00 Deposition fee 1691.65 Notice of Settlement Filing fee 6.75 Court Reporter 994.50 Total $8,122.06 The Court approves the following distribution: Attorney’s fees (25%) $37,000.00 Medical expenses 2,871.05 Costs (reduced) 8,122.06 Total fees and costs $47,993.11

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2020

JUANA EUSTOLIA HERNANDEZ VS. KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC.

On December 13, 2019, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement indicating that: (1) the parties agreed to a conditional settlement agreement contingent on the satisfactory completion of specified terms that are not to be performed within 45 days of the date of the settlement; and (2) a request for dismissal would be filed no later than February 12, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Sep 09, 2020

MOHAMED SALEH VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

On March 16, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement. On August 12, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of $33,974.02. ANALYSIS: I. Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs A. Request for Judicial Notice Plaintiff requests that the Court take judicial notice of the following documents: · Exhibit 13: fee motion that Stephen Parnell filed in Hernandez v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 08, 2020

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

On February 4, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement of the Entire Case. The settlement, against Defendant Glendale Unified School District (“GUSD”) in the total amount of $225,000. (Petition ¶ 11.) The petition states that, of the $225,000, $5,542.17 is for medical expenses, $56,250.00 is for attorneys’ fees, and $13,207.83 is for expenses, leaving a balance of $150,000. (Petition ¶¶ 13-14, 17.) The plaintiff’’s attorney proposes to deposited the funds in a trust account at U.S. Bank.

  • Hearing

    Sep 08, 2020

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY VS. LETSGOEXPO, INC., ET AL

On January 6, 2012, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement relative to Lipschultz. The court entered a joint judgment against Lipschultz and LetsGoExpo for $339,871.50 on April 17, 2012. On May 16, 2019, Plaintiff filed a notice of partial satisfaction of judgment acknowledging payment of $209,000 by judgment debtors. RULING: Granted. Plaintiff moves for an order requiring LetsGoExpor, Inc., Southland Eye – Drs.

  • Hearing

    Sep 08, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MOHAMED SALEH VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

On March 16, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement. On August 12, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of $33,974.02. ANALYSIS: Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Request for Judicial Notice Plaintiff requests that the Court take judicial notice of the following documents: Exhibit 13: fee motion that Stephen Parnell filed in Hernandez v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 08, 2020

C AYRAPETYAN VS GLENDALE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL

On February 4, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement of the Entire Case. The settlement, against Defendant Glendale Unified School District (“GUSD”) in the total amount of $225,000. (Petition ¶ 11.) The petition states that, of the $225,000, $5,542.17 is for medical expenses, $56,250.00 is for attorneys’ fees, and $13,207.83 is for expenses, leaving a balance of $150,000. (Petition ¶¶ 13-14, 17.) The plaintiff’’s attorney proposes to deposited the funds in a trust account at U.S. Bank.

  • Hearing

    Sep 08, 2020

MICHELLE GARCIA VS THE SPRINGS APARTMENTS

On February 4, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement of the Entire Case. The settlement, against Defendant Glendale Unified School District (“GUSD”) in the total amount of $225,000. (Petition ¶ 11.) The petition states that, of the $225,000, $5,542.17 is for medical expenses, $56,250.00 is for attorneys’ fees, and $13,207.83 is for expenses, leaving a balance of $150,000. (Petition ¶¶ 13-14, 17.) The plaintiff’’s attorney proposes to deposited the funds in a trust account at U.S. Bank.

  • Hearing

    Sep 08, 2020

YOSSI SABAG VS FCA US LLC

On or about September 28, 2017, Defendants agreed to settle the case with Plaintiff. (9/28/17 Notice of Settlement.) As the prevailing party in this action, Plaintiff is entitled to “costs and expenses” pursuant to Civil Code §1794(d).

  • Hearing

    Sep 04, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 142     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.