Sutherland v. City of Stockton ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ----oo0oo---- 11 12 KAREN SUTHERLAND, as mother of No. 2:21-cv-01855 WBS AC decedent; ERICA RAE BELATTI, 13 Guardian Ad Litem for S.A.S., JR., son of decedent, and as a 14 successor in interest to the ORDER RE: PETITION FOR deceased; and D.J.S., daughter MINORS’ COMPROMISE 15 of decedent, and as a successor in interest to the deceased, 16 Plaintiffs, 17 v. 18 CITY OF STOCKTON; OFFICER RONALD 19 ZALUNARDO, in his individual capacity; OFFICER JOHN 20 AFANASIEV, in his individual capacity; CHIEF ERIC JONES, in 21 his individual capacity; and DOES 1-5, inclusive, 22 Defendants. 23 24 ----oo0oo---- 25 Plaintiffs Karen Sutherland, the mother of the deceased 26 Shayne Sutherland, S.A.S. Jr., son of deceased, and D.J.S., 27 daughter of deceased, brought this wrongful death action 28 1 asserting various constitutional violations under 42 U.S.C. § 2 1983. The minor plaintiffs further asserted state law claims for 3 wrongful death, assault and battery, negligence, and violations 4 of the Tom Bane Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1. (Second Am. Compl. 5 (“SAC”) (Docket No. 21).) Erica Rae Belatti was appointed 6 guardian ad litem for the minor plaintiffs by the court on March 7 1, 2022. (Docket No. 15.) Minor plaintiffs S.A.S. Jr. and 8 D.J.S. now bring this petition for minors’ compromise in relation 9 to a settlement agreement resolving all claims against all 10 defendants. (Docket No. 64.) Defendants have filed a non- 11 opposition. (Docket No. 69.) 12 District courts evaluating minors’ compromises must 13 “limit the scope of their review to the question whether the net 14 amount distributed to [a] minor plaintiff in the settlement is 15 fair and reasonable, in light of the facts of the case, the 16 minor’s specific claim, and recovery in similar cases,” “without 17 regard to the proportion of the total settlement value designated 18 for adult co-plaintiffs or plaintiffs’ counsel.” Robidoux v. 19 Rosengren, 638 F.3d 1177, 1181-82 (9th Cir. 2011). 20 The gross settlement amount is $6,000,000, with 21 $1,167,150.89 to be distributed to each of the three plaintiffs, 22 and $2,498,547.33 to be distributed to counsel for attorneys’ 23 fees and costs based on a preexisting fee agreement. (Docket No. 24 64 at 15-17.) 25 The court is familiar with the allegations made by 26 plaintiffs regarding the officers’ use of excessive force 27 resulting in Mr. Sutherland’s death. The court finds the 28 $1,167,150.89 amount to be distributed to each minor child fair eee eee IRIE I OE IIE IEE EI ED EE 1 and reasonable based on the allegations made and a review of 2 other wrongful death actions. Accordingly, the court will grant 3 plaintiffs’ petition. 4 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the settlement of the 5 | minor plaintiffs’ claims against all defendants as comprised 6 pursuant to the terms of the settlement reached by the parties, 7 and as further described in plaintiffs’ petition for approval of 8 minors’ compromise (Docket No. 64), is approved. 9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that annuities for minor 10 plaintiffs S.A.S. Jr. and D.J.S. shall be purchased as outlined 11 in Exhibits A and B, respectively, in the Supplemental 12 Declaration of V. James DeSimone, Esq. (Docket No. 68).! 13 | Dated: May 23, 2024 he bloom HK Ad. b€ 14 WILLIAM B. SHUBB UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 I] 1 The hearing on this motion, currently scheduled on May 28 | 28, 2024, is hereby VACATED.