Cross

Cross v. Meza CA6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 17, 2014H038960California1,730 words

Opinion

Opinion

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The instant case arises from the settlement of a personal injury action that was filed in December 2010. On November 4, 2011, the Monterey County Superior Court held a mandatory settlement conference. During the settlement conference, both plaintiffs Juan and Angelita Cross and their counsel were personally present in court. Counsel of record for defendant Domingo Meza’s insurance carrier, Edward Cullen, was not personally present, because he was recovering from knee surgery. In his place,

1 All further unspecified statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure. attorney Susan Grey made a special appearance. A representative for the insurance carrier was not present, but was available to Ms. Grey by telephone standby.2 At the conference, a settlement was reached that provided that defendant’s insurance carrier would pay $19,900 to Juan Cross, and $17,400 to Angelina Cross. The specific terms were placed on the record in court. In addition, Ms. Grey stated that she was “thoroughly briefed on the case [and] was aware that additional settlement talks between the carrier and Mr. Cullen were to occur the morning of the settlement conference.” Ms. Grey…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.