DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC23611163·sf·Civil·Civil
Hearing 12 months agoGRANTED

SIRVAN YOUNESI VS. NICOLE DONN ET AL

DEFENDANT NICOLE DONN'S MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT

Hearing date
Aug 21, 2025
Department
301
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffSIRVAN YOUNESI
DefendantNICOLE DONN

Ruling

Matter on the Law & Motion / Discovery calendar for Thursday, August 21, 2025, Line 3 [PART 2 OF 2 OF THE TENTATIVE RULING]. DEFENDANT NICOLE DONN'S MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT.

Younesi argues there is no settlement because he did not individually sign it. He relies on cases that predate an amendment to section 664.6 allowing an attorney to bind the client with a signed writing. (See 2020 Cal. Legis. Serv. Ch. 290 (A.B. 2723) (West).) Those cases are inapposite in light of the amendment.

Younesi also presents a declaration that he did not in fact agree to the stated terms. (Younesi Dec. para. 7.) That is also immaterial: a settlement is enforceable once the plain terms of section 664.6, subdivision (a), are satisfied, regardless of a different subjective intent.

The statute further acknowledges remedies for someone in Younesi's situation; Code of Civil Procedure, section 664.6, subdivision (d) states that, "[i]n addition to any available civil remedies, an attorney who signs a writing on behalf of a party pursuant to subdivision (b) without the party's express authorization shall, absent good cause, be subject to professional discipline." This provision indicates the Legislature's intent that a settlement be enforceable under the plain terms of section 664.6, subdivision (a), regardless of a party's claim that his or her attorney made a mistake in accepting a settlement offer.

Donn may submit a proposed judgment in accord with the settlement agreement. The proposed judgment must first be provided to Younesi pursuant to Rule of Court 3.1312.

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.

Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept301tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.

The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion or Discovery Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address [END OF PART 2 OF 2 OF THE TENTATIVE RULING]. =(301/CVA) | |

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