DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
24STCV13581·la·Civil·Tort / Contract
Hearing todayGRANTED

Graciela Fernandez, et al. v. Decartes Financial Corporation, et al.

Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement

Hearing date
Aug 31, 2026
Department
513
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffGraciela Fernandez
PlaintiffDaminuque Ledane Wilson
PlaintiffJanae Gomez
PlaintiffJa'Saih Gomez
PlaintiffKhylee Wilson
PlaintiffAyanna Wilson
DefendantDescartes Financial Corporation
DefendantDescartes Financial, LTD

Ruling

of Los Angeles - Central District Department 513 Graciela Fernandez, et al.; Plaintiffs, vs. Decartes Financial Corporation, et al.; Defendants. | Case No.: |

| | | Hearing Date: | August 31, 2026 | | | Time: | 10:00 a.m. | | | [Tentative] Order RE: Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement | MOVING PARTY: Defendants Descartes Financial Corporation and Descartes Financial, LTD RESPONDING PARTY: No response Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement The court considered the moving papers filed in connection with this motion.

DISCUSSION Defendants Descartes Financial Corporation and Descartes Financial, LTD ("Defendants") move the court for an order determining that the settlements between Defendants and plaintiffs Daminuque Ledane Wilson, Janae Gomez, Ja'Saih Gomez, Khylee Wilson, and Ayanna Wilson ("Plaintiffs") are made in good faith pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 877 and 877.6.

Any party to an action "in which it is alleged that two or more parties are joint tortfeasors or co obligors on a contract debt" is entitled to a hearing "on the issue of the good faith of a settlement entered into by the plaintiff or other claimant and one or more alleged tortfeasors or co-obligors, upon giving notice in the manner provided in subdivision (b) of Section 1005." (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 877.6(a)(1).)

There is no precise yardstick for measuring the "good faith" of a settlement with one of several tortfeasors, but it must harmonize the public policy favoring settlements with the competing public policy favoring equitable sharing of costs among tortfeasors. (Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & Associates (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488, 499 [setting forth factors for consideration in determining good faith of settlement].)

The party contesting the settlement bears the burden of proving that it is in bad faith. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec.877.6(d).)

The court finds, in consideration of the Tech-Bilt factors and the absence of any opposition to this motion, that the settlements between Defendants and Plaintiffs were made in good faith.

ORDER The court GRANTS defendants Descartes Financial Corporation and Descartes Financial, LTD's motion for determination of good faith settlement.

The court finds that the settlements between (1) plaintiffs Daminuque Ledane Wilson, Janae Gomez, Ja'Saih Gomez, Khylee Wilson, and Ayanna Wilson, and (2) defendants Descartes Financial Corporation and Descartes Financial, LTD were made in good faith pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6.

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6, subdivision (c), the court's order shall bar any other joint tortfeasor or co-obligor from any further claims against the settling tortfeasor or co-obligor for equitable comparative contribution, or partial or comparative indemnity, based on comparative negligence or comparative fault.

The court orders defendants Descartes Financial Corporation and Descartes Financial, LTD to give notice of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 31, 2026 _____________________________ Robert B. Broadbelt III Judge of the Superior Court

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