Sasha Desvaux de Marigny, et al v. Julie Glavin, et al

Cross-Defendant Peter Levi Plumbing, LLC, filed a motion on February 23, 2026, seeking court determination that its settlement with Plaintiffs Sasha Desvauz de Marigny and Hendrik Lies is in “good faith” pursuant to Cal. Code of Civil; Procedure §877.6, and that the settlement bars the prosecution of any cross complaint and other claims based in equity and tort.

California Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter “CCP”) Section 877.6 entitles a released party to a judicial determination of the issue of the good faith of the settlement between the released party and the complainant. When a person alleged to be a joint tortfeasor is released prior to judgment or verdict, the release has the effect of discharging the released party from all liability for contribution from other parties, as long as the release was given in good faith. (CCP §877.6(c)). The party asserting the lack of good faith shall have the burden of proof on that issue. (CCP §877.6(d)).

Plaintiffs have not filed a response nor did they file an opposition to the motion to approve a good faith settlement. The failure to oppose is considered consent to the granting of the motion. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.54(c); Local Rule Marin, Civil 2.8G.1.)

Cross-Defendant’s motion is therefore GRANTED.

Cross-Defendant is to lodge a proposed order for consideration.

Should any party wish to contest this tentative, the matter will be heard on May 29, 2026, at 1:30 pm in this department. Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.10(A), (B), which provides that if a party wants to present oral argument, the party must contact the Court at (415) 444-7046 and all opposing parties by 4:00 p.m. the court day preceding the scheduled hearing.

Parties must comply with Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.10(A), (B), which provides that if a party wants to present oral argument, the party must contact the Court at (415) 444-7046 and all opposing parties by 4:00 p.m. the court day preceding the scheduled hearing. Notice may be by telephone or in person to all other parties that argument is being requested (i.e., it is not necessary to speak with counsel or parties directly.) Unless the Court and all parties have been notified of a request to present oral argument, no oral argument will be permitted except by order of the Court. In the event no party requests oral argument in accordance with Rule 2.10(B), the tentative ruling shall become the order of the court.