Case Number: LC098858 Hearing Date: May 15, 2014 Dept: 92

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT

HOVHANNES HOVHANNISYAN,
Plaintiff(s),
vs.

PARVIZ SALEHI, M.D., ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

CASE NO: LC098858

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT

Dept. 92
1:30 p.m. — #37
May 15, 2014

Defendant, Parviz Salehi, M.D.’s Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement is Granted.

Plaintiff, Havhannes Hovhanissyan filed this action against Defendants, Parviz Salehi, M.D., Michael Zadeh, M.D., and Valley Presbyterian Hospital for damages arising out of a clamp that was left in Plaintiff’s body following a colon surgery.

On 9/11/13, Valley Presbyterian filed an application for determination of good faith settlement, indicating it had settled with Plaintiff for $90,000. No party filed a motion to oppose the application, and therefore the application was granted as a matter of course.

At this time, Dr. Salehi has agreed to settle the case with Plaintiff for $100,000, and seeks an order that his settlement is in good faith. Dr. Zadeh opposes the motion, contending Dr. Salehi is solely at fault for Plaintiff’s claimed damages, which are in the amount of approximately $375,000 ($125,000 economic and $250,000 non-economic). Dr. Zadeh argues the $100,000 settlement is insufficient because it will leave him, a non-responsible party, holding the proverbial bag for the remaining $185,000 in claimed damages, even if he is only found to bear a very small percentage of the actual fault of Plaintiff’s injuries.

Pursuant to Civil Code §1431.2, in a personal injury suit, the defendants are jointly and severally liable for economic damages ONLY. Each defendant is “liable only for the amount of non-economic damages allocated to that defendant in direct proportion to that defendant’s percentage of fault.” Thus, if Dr. Zadeh is, by way of example, found to be 5% at fault for Plaintiff’s damages, he would be liable for 100% of Plaintiff’s economic damages, but only 5% of Plaintiff’s non-economic damages.

In this case, even if Dr. Zadeh’s calculation of Plaintiff’s economic damages is believed to be true ($127,153.02), the settlements of Dr. Salehi and Valley Presbyterian are more than sufficient to cover 100% of the economic damages.

Notably, per Greathouse v. Amcord, Inc. (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 831, 841, any attempt on the part of the settling parties to allocate the settlement between economic and non-economic damages is non-binding; per Gouvis Engineering v. Superior Court (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 642, 651, the Court cannot make such an allocation either; it is up to the jury to provide the allocation.

Dr. Zadeh contends Plaintiff is seeking to recover $377,153.02 — $127,153.02 in economic damages and $250,000 in non-economic damages. This means approximately 1/3 of Plaintiff’s claimed damages are economic and approximately 2/3 of his claimed damages are non-economic. If the jury were to apportion Dr. Zadeh’s settlement and Valley Presbyterian’s settlement accordingly (1/3 to economic damages and 2/3 to non-economic damages), then it would allocate $57,000 to economic damages. This would leave Dr. Zadeh, at most, responsible for $70,153 in economic damages (assuming he were found to be at least 1% at fault).

Importantly, one of the Tech-Bilt factors is an understanding that a party should pay less in settlement than he would pay if the case went to trial. Additionally, Dr. Salehi argues that Plaintiff’s actual economic damages are in the amount of approximately $16,000, not $127,000; thus, at a minimum, the amount of the economic damages is in dispute.

The burden of proof on a motion for determination of good faith settlement rests squarely on the party opposing the motion. See CCP §877.6(d). In light of the foregoing, the Court finds Dr. Zadeh failed to meet that burden. The motion for determination of good faith settlement is therefore granted.

Dated this 15th day of May, 2014

Hon. Elia Weinbach
Judge of the Superior Court