Shin v. Yoon ( 2019 )

1 B. Christine Park, SBN234689 CHRISTINE PARK LAW FIRM, APC 2 11040 Bollinger Canyon Road, Suite E-202 San Ramon, CA 94582 3 Tel: (323) 578-6957; Fax: (213) 289-1977 4 boksoonpark@gmail.com Attorneys for Defendants and Counter-Complainants 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 SU JUNG SHIN and HYUN JU SHIN, Case No. 1:18-cv-00381 AWI SKO 10 Plaintiffs, Complaint Filed: March 21, 2018 11 Trial Date: May 19, 2020 v. 12 STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: GOOD ROBERT YOUNG YOON; KYOUNG MEE FAITH SETTLEMENT PURSUANT TO 13 YOON; KYOUNG SUP YOON; Y & Y CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC., THE PROCEDURE, SECTIONS 877 et seq. 14 VICTUS GROUP, INC.; BLACKSTONE SEATTLE, LLC; YOON & YOON 15 INVESTMENTS, LLC; and DOES 2 through 20, inclusive, [Submitted concurrently with Notice of 16 Settlement; Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Defendants. re: Stay of Entire Case Against Remaining 17 Parties; and [Proposed] Stipulated Judgment] 18 BOB YOUNG YOON, erroneously sued as 19 R suo cb ce er st s oY r-o iu nn g i nY teo reo sn t, a tos a Yn oi un nd giv i Sdu oa ol n an Yd o oas n ’a s estate; Y&Y PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, 20 INC., a California Corporation; KYOUNG MEE YOON, an individual; and KYOUNG SUP 21 YOON, an individual, 22 Counter-Complainants, 23 v. 24 SU JUNG SHIN, an individual, and HYUN JU SHIN, an individual, 25 Counter-Defendants. 26 27 A signed version of the following stipulation was filed on August 28, 2019: 1 STIPULATION FOR GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT 2 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiffs SU JUNG SHIN and HYUN 3 JU SHIN (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) and Defendants, BOB YOUNG YOON (“BOB”), Y&Y 4 PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC. (“YY PROPERTY”), YOON & YOON INVESTMENTS, 5 LLC (“YYI”), THE VICTUS GROUP, INC. (“VICTUS”), BLACKSTONE SEATTLE, LLC 6 (“BLACKSTONE”), KYOUNG SUP YOON (“SUP”) AND KYOUNG MEE YOON (“MEE”) 7 (collectively, “Defendants”) (altogether, “Parties”), through their counsel of record, as follows: 8 9 1. Defendants have settled with Plaintiffs for the payment of one million and 10 seven hundred thousand dollars ($1,700,000.00), through a Stipulated Judgment against 11 Defendants Bob Young Yoon, YYI and YYPM. Rather than incur the burden, expense, and delay 12 in seeking a judicial determination of good faith settlement pursuant to California Code of Civil 13 Procedure sections 877 and 877.6, the parties agree that the settlement of Defendants and 14 Plaintiffs is in good faith under these code sections. 15 2. All parties to this matter agree that the settlement entered into between Plaintiffs 16 and Defendants complies with the factors and considerations set forth in Tech-Built, Inc. v. 17 Woodward-Clyde & Associates (1985) 37 Cal.3d 488 and its progeny. 18 19 3. California Code of Civil Procedure section 877 et seq., rather than federal 20 common law, governs the determination of whether the settlement entered into by and between 21 the Plaintiffs and Defendants is in good faith. Where, as here, “a district court sits in diversity, 22 or hears state law claims based on supplemental jurisdiction, the court applies state substantive 23 law to the state law claims.” (Mason & Dixon Intermodal, Inc. v. Lapmaster Int’l, 632 F.3d 1056, 24 1060 (9th Cir. 2011); Galam v. Carmel (In re Larry's Apartment), 249 F.3d 832, 837 (9th Cir. 25 2001) (“It is well established that [u]nder the Erie doctrine, federal courts sitting in diversity 26 apply state substantive law” (internal quotations and citations omitted).) “California Code of 27 1 Civil Procedure section 877 constitutes state substantive law.” Mason & Dixon Intermodal, Inc., 2 632 F.3d at 1060 (holding the district court correctly applied California Code of Civil Procedure 3 section 877 as state substantive law to resolve motion to dismiss pursuant to good faith 4 settlement); Fed. Savings & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Butler, 904 F.2d 505, 511 (9th Cir. 1990) (holding 5 that California Code of Civil Procedure section 877 constitutes substantive law); See also Federal 6 Savings and Loan Ins. Corp. v. Butler, 904 F.2d 505, 511 (9th Cir. 1990) and Yanez v. United 7 States, 989 F.2d 323, 327-28 (9th Cir. 1993.) 8 4. The parties to this matter also agree that, pursuant to the California Code of 9 Civil Procedure §877.6(c), all past, present, and future claims by any other party, or any other 10 joint tortfeasor or co-obligor, including non-parties to this action, for any claims of equitable 11 comparative contribution or partial or comparative indemnity, based on comparative negligence 12 or comparative fault, against Defendants are barred. 13 14 5. The parties to this matter agree that the filing of an application and/or motion 15 for determination of good faith settlement would be a waste of client and judicial resources. 16 Therefore, the parties waive notice of any submission of this stipulation for approval by the 17 Court, whether on an ex parte basis or by formal noticed motion, because there is no opposition 18 to Defendants seeking an order that the settlement is in good faith. 19 6. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure sections 877 and 877.6, all 20 further Claims against Defendants for equitable comparative contribution, or partial or 21 comparative indemnity shall be barred. 22 23 7. This Stipulation may be presented with separate signature pages and by 24 facsimile. 25 Dated: August 20, 2019 CHRISTINE PARK LAW FIRM, APC 26 27 By: 1 B. Christine Park, Esq. Attorney for Defendants and Counter- 2 Complainants Bob Young Yoon, YY Property Management, Inc., Kyoung Mee 3 Yoon, Kyoung Sup Yoon, The Victus Group, Inc., Yoon & Yoon Investments, 4 LLC, and Blackstone Seattle, LLC 5 6 Dated: August __, 2019 GOLDBERG SEGALLA, LLP 7 8 By: David Y. Choi, Esq. 9 Attorney for Plaintiffs and Counter- Defendants Su Jung Shin and Hyun Ju Shin 10 11 12 After consideration, the Court will give effect to the above stipulation. 13 14 ORDER 15 GOOD CAUSE HAVING BEEN SHOWN AND THE PARTIES HAVING 16 STIPULATED TO THE SAME, the Court finds that the above-stated STIPULATION is 17 sanctioned by the Court and shall be and now is the Order of the Court. The Settlement 18 Agreement between Plaintiffs and SU JUNG SHIN and HYUN JU SHIN (collectively, 19 “Plaintiffs”) and Defendants, BOB YOUNG YOON, Y&Y PROPERTY MANAGEMNET, 20 INC., YOON & YOON INVESTMENTS, LLC, THE VICTUS GROUP, INC., 21 22 BLACKSTONE SEATTLE, LLC, KYOUNG SUP YOON and KYOUNG MEE YOON 23 (collectively, “Defendants”) (altogether, “Parties”) is hereby deemed to be a good faith 24 settlement within the meaning and effect of California Code of Civil Procedure §§ 877 and 25 877.6. Any further claims of any other claimant relating to the subject matter of this lawsuit 26 against the Defendants for equitable comparative contribution, or partial or comparative 27 1 indemnity, based on comparative negligence or comparative fault are hereby barred and dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 877.6, subdivision (c). 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dp 6 Dated: _ September 10, 2019 = : — SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION OF GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, SECTIONS 877 et seq.