arrow left
arrow right
  • Zaida Pacheco vs. 5198 Fowler, LP / COMPLEX10 Unlimited - Construction Defect document preview
  • Zaida Pacheco vs. 5198 Fowler, LP / COMPLEX10 Unlimited - Construction Defect document preview
  • Zaida Pacheco vs. 5198 Fowler, LP / COMPLEX10 Unlimited - Construction Defect document preview
  • Zaida Pacheco vs. 5198 Fowler, LP / COMPLEX10 Unlimited - Construction Defect document preview
  • Zaida Pacheco vs. 5198 Fowler, LP / COMPLEX10 Unlimited - Construction Defect document preview
  • Zaida Pacheco vs. 5198 Fowler, LP / COMPLEX10 Unlimited - Construction Defect document preview
  • Zaida Pacheco vs. 5198 Fowler, LP / COMPLEX10 Unlimited - Construction Defect document preview
  • Zaida Pacheco vs. 5198 Fowler, LP / COMPLEX10 Unlimited - Construction Defect document preview
						
                                

Preview

1 Kathleen Q. Brown (SBN 186148) LAW OFFICES OF JOHN A. BIARD E-FILED 2 P.O. Box 64093 10/6/2020 1:25 PM St. Paul, MN 55164-0093 Superior Court of California 3 Physical Address: 11070 White Rock Road, Suite 200 County of Fresno Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 By: A. Ramos, Deputy 4 Telephone: 916-638-6610 Facsimile: 855-631-5920 5 E-Mail: kqbrown@travelers.com 6 Attorneys for Cross-Defendant 7 QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNTY OF FRESNO 11 ZAIDA PACHECO; et al., Case No.: 19CECG01330 12 Assigned to Judge Rosemary T. McGuire, Dept. 403 Plaintiffs, 13 v. 14 APPLICATION FOR GOOD FAITH 5198 FOWLER, LP, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED SETTLEMENT 15 PARTNERSHIP, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 5198 FOWLER, L.P., 18 Complaint Filed: 4/18/2019 / XC Filed: 10/17/2019 Cross – Complainant, Trial Date: TBA 19 v. 20 84 LUMBER COMPANY; et al, and ROES 1- 21 600; 22 Cross – Defendants. 23 AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS. 24 25 TO THE COURT, TO ALL PARTIES, AND TO THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD: 26 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER 27 applies to this Court for a determination that their settlement with Plaintiff-HOMEOWNERS was made 28 in good faith within the meaning of California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 877 and 877.6(a)(2), and for the issuance of an Order declaring that this good faith settlement bars all present and future claims -1- APPLICATION FOR GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT 1 against Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER based upon equitable contribution 2 or partial comparative indemnity. 3 A Notice of Settlement, Declaration, and [Proposed] Order are filed concurrently herewith and 4 have been sent by certified-mail, return-receipt requested, on the date of the Notice, too all parties in this 5 action. 6 STATEMENT OF THE CASE 7 5198 FOWLER, L.P. caused to be built in Fowler, California, a residential community, which is 8 the subject of this lawsuit, consisting of residential homes (hereinafter “the PROJECT”). (See, 9 Declaration of Kathleen Q. Brown, at ¶3.) 10 On or about June 27, 2019, the owners (hereinafter “HOMEOWNERS”) of 15 of the subject 11 homes in the above-referenced PROJECT filed the First Amended Complaint against 5198 FOWLER, 12 L.P. pursuant to California Code Section 896 et seq., alleging that the subject homes contain 13 construction deficiencies, which have caused property damage. In response, on or about October 17, 14 2019, 5198 FOWLER, L.P. filed its Cross-Complaint and later a ROE AMENDMENT against 15 numerous parties, including Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER alleging 16 multiple causes of action for: (1) Breach of Written Contract to Indemnify, Defend, and Obtain 17 Insurance; (2) Equitable Indemnity; (3) Contribution and Repayment; (4) Declaratory Relief 18 (Subcontractor Defendants); (5) Declaratory Relief re: Insurance. On May 29, 2020, Cross-Defendant 19 Fresno Distributing Co. filed a Cross-Complaint against Roes 1-10 alleging Equitable Indemnity, 20 Contribution and Apportionment of Fault. As of this filing, QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER 21 has not been named in that Cross-Complaint. (See, Declaration of Kathleen Q. Brown, ¶4.) 22 Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER contends that it performed its work 23 in a good, workman-like manner and in compliance with the applicable standard of care and that no 24 alleged damages were caused by its work. Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER merely supplied window coverings for the homes. (See, Declaration of Kathleen Q. Brown, ¶5.) After 25 negotiations, Travelers Insurance Company, on behalf of Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS 26 DESIGN CENTER negotiated a settlement with the HOMEOWNERS. The settlement includes a 27 release of 5198 FOWLER, L.P. for Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER’s 28 scope of work at the PROJECT. (See, Declaration of Kathleen Q. Brown, ¶6.) -2- APPLICATION FOR GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT 1 SETTLING PARTIES 2 The settling parties are HOMEOWNERS and Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN 3 CENTER. (See, Declaration of Kathleen Q. Brown, ¶7.) 4 TERMS OF THE SETTLEMENT 5 Travelers Insurance Company and other insurers, on behalf of Cross-Defendant QUALITY 6 CARPETS DESIGN CENTER will pay HOMEOWNERS a total of $3,000.00 in exchange for a release 7 of all claims by HOMEOWNERS arising out of Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN 8 CENTER’s involvement with the subject homes involved this action. Each of the settling parties will 9 bear its own costs of litigation, including attorneys’ fees. Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS 10 DESIGN CENTER is not admitting liability. (See, Declaration of Kathleen Q. Brown, ¶6.) The 11 settlement is subject to a good faith settlement determination by this Court. 12 AFFECTED PLEADINGS 13 Any and all complaints and cross-complaints filed by and against Cross-Defendant QUALITY 14 CARPETS DESIGN CENTER will be affected by this Application. Specifically, the Cross-Complaints 15 filed by 5198 FOWLER, L.P. and FRESNO DISTRIBUTING CO. 16 APPLICATION 17 By this Application, Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER requests: 18 The Settlement Between HOMEOWNERS and Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER Should be Deemed to be in Good Faith 19 20 Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 877.6 and the common law 21 requirements of Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward Clyde & Associates, (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488, the settlement 22 that was reached by HOMEOWNERS and Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER 23 should be deemed to be in good faith. 24 This settlement was reached as the result of a bargaining process with no intention to tortuously 25 injure any of the parties of this lawsuit. (See, Declaration of Kathleen Q. Brown, ¶7.) Travelers 26 Insurance Company’s agreement to pay $3,000 on behalf of Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS 27 DESIGN CENTER to settle this case was based in part on the “nuisance value” of settling the case 28 before more in-depth discovery was propounded and before the costs associated with expert discovery -3- APPLICATION FOR GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT 1 was incurred. Moreover, Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER is a peripheral 2 party with minimal potential liability. 3 Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER’s settlement will have little or no 4 impact on the remaining parties. The settlement is within the ballpark. No fraud or other misconduct is 5 behind the settlement. (See, Declaration of Kathleen Q. Brown, ¶7.) 6 The Court should deem the settlement between HOMEOWNERS and Cross-Defendant 7 QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER as being made in good faith because said settlement adhered 8 to both the Tech-Bilt factors and the statutory requirements under Civil Code Section 877.6. 9 The Settlement Bar Any Other Joint Tortfeasor or Co-Obligor From Any Further Claims Against Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER for Equitable 10 Comparative Contribution, or Partial or Comparative Indemnity, Based on Comparative Negligence or Comparative Fault. 11 12 As stated in California Code of Civil Procedure Section 877.6(c), all present and future cross- 13 complaints for equitable comparative contribution or partial or comparative indemnity based on 14 comparative negligence or comparative fault and/or implied contractual indemnity against Cross- 15 Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER in connection with this action should be forever 16 barred. 17 California Code of Civil Procedure Section 877.6 is not discretionary in nature. The statute 18 requires that a finding that a settlement was reached in good faith bars any other joint tortfeasor or co- 19 obligor from any further claims against the settling tortfeasor. As the settlement between 20 HOMEOWNERS and Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER was reached in 21 good faith, Section 877.6(c) applies to any and all present and future claims by other joint tortfeasors or 22 co-obligors against Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER for equitable 23 comparative contribution or partial or comparative indemnity based on comparative negligence or 24 comparative fault. 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// /// -4- APPLICATION FOR GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT 1 CONCLUSION 2 Cross-Defendant QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER respectfully submits this 3 Application under California Code of Civil Procedure 877.6(a)(2) for determination of good faith 4 settlement. 5 LAW OFFICES OF JOHN A. BIARD 6 7 8 Dated: October 5, 2020 9 Kathleen Q. Brown Counsel for Cross-Defendant 10 QUALITY CARPETS DESIGN CENTER 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -5- APPLICATION FOR GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT