DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25CV2683·eldorado·Civil·Minor’s Compromise
Hearing about 1 month agoCONTINUED

ROWE, ET AL. v. REYNOLDS

Petition for Minor’s Compromise

Hearing date
Jul 17, 2026
Department
Four
Judge
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$50,000$12,500$1,154.00$1,459.31

Parties

PlaintiffRowe
DefendantReynolds

Ruling

LAW AND MOTION CALENDAR JULY 17, 2026

5. ROWE, ET AL. v. REYNOLDS, 25CV2683

Petition for Minor’s Compromise

The proposed settlement amount is $50,000, which appears reasonable to the court.

In the amended petition filed May 8,2026, counsel declares their fee agreement

with the minor plaintiff includes a contingency percentage ranging from 40 to

45 percent, depending on the time frame in which the case settles or is resolved by

judgment. (Saltzstein Decl., ¶ 7.) However, counsel then states that a 25 percent

reduced contingency fee is reasonable in this case. (Saltzstein Decl., ¶ 8.) 25 percent of the gross settlement amount equals $12,500. It appears that this is the amount of

attorney fees counsel is claiming. However, the accounting summary lists $12,500 under

medical expenses, not under attorney fees. (Petn., ¶ 16.) Elsewhere in the petition, the

medical lien amount is listed as $1,154.00. (Petn., ¶ 12.b(5)(a)(ii).) In the accounting

summary, however, it appears the amount of medical expenses is $1,459.31. The court

needs clarification regarding the breakdown of the settlement. (Petn., ¶ 16.)

TENTATIVE RULING # 5: APPEARANCES ARE REQUIRED AT 1:30 P.M., FRIDAY,

JULY 17, 2026, IN DEPARTMENT FOUR.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share