1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HEATHER LOGUE; L.L; E.L.; A.L.; Case No.: 19cv189-BAS-AGS RONALD GREATHOUSE; 12 LORRAINE GREATHOUSE, REPORT AND 13 RECOMMENDATION FOR ORDER Plaintiffs, GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION 14 v. TO CONFIRM MINORS’ 15 COMPROMISE CURTIS MANAGEMEMT COMPANY,

16 INC.; [ECF No. 30] THE BLUFFS OF FOX RUN 17 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, 18 Defendants. 19 20 21 This Report and Recommendation is submitted to United States District Judge 22 Cynthia A. Bashant pursuant to

(b) and Civil Local Rule 17.1 of the United 23 States District Court for the Southern District of California. 24 Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion to confirm minors’ 25 compromise. ECF No. 30-1 (“Mot.”). Plaintiffs request that the Court approve the proposed 26 settlement entered on behalf of A.L., E.L., and L.L. (collectively “Minor Plaintiffs”).

at 27 3. Minor Plaintiffs are represented by Plaintiff Heather Logue, their guardian ad litem. For 28 1 the reasons set forth below, the Court RECOMMENDS that Plaintiffs’ motion be 2 GRANTED. 3 I. BACKGROUND 4 On January 28, 2019, Minor Plaintiffs, along with Plaintiffs Ms. Logue, Ronald 5 Greathouse, and Lorraine Greathouse, filed a complaint against Defendants Curtis 6 Management Company, Inc. and The Bluffs of Fox Run Homeowners Association 7 (collectively “Defendants”) alleging violations of the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), 42 U.S.C. 8 § 3601 et seq., and related federal and state laws. ECF No. See ECF No. 1. Plaintiffs alleged 9 that Defendants enforced rules at its condominium complex that targeted children and 10 discriminated against families with children by preventing children from playing outside 11 in the common areas. Id. at 2-4. 12 On May 24, 2019, the district judge issued an order granting Defendants’ motion to 13 dismiss punitive damages with leave to amend. ECF No. 18. 14 On June 14, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) against the 15 same Defendants and alleging the same claims as the original complaint. See ECF No. 20. 16 On September 12, 2019, the parties settled the case. Mot. at 3; ECF No. 29. Pursuant 17 to the proposed settlement, each Minor Plaintiff will receive $2500 for his or her 18 compromise. Mot. at 3. 19 On November 14, 2019, the Honorable Andrew G. Schopler requested a magistrate 20 judge be randomly assigned to handle the motion to confirm minors’ compromise and the 21 undersigned magistrate judge was subsequently assigned. ECF No. 34. 22 II. LEGAL STANDARD 23 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(c), district courts have a special duty 24 to safeguard the interests of litigants who are minors. Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c); CivLR 17.1.a.; 25 see also Robidoux v. Rosengren,

(9th Cir. 2011). Rule 17(c) states 26 that a district court “must appoint a guardian ad litem—or issue another appropriate 27 order—to protect a minor or incompetent person who is unrepresented in an action.” Fed. 28 R. Civ. P. 17(c). With respect to proposed settlements in lawsuits involving minor 1 plaintiffs, this special duty requires district courts to “conduct [their] own inquiry to 2 determine whether the settlement serves the best interests of the minor.” Robidoux v. 3 Rosengren,

(quoting Dacanay v. Mendoza,

(9th Cir. 4 1978)). The district court considers “whether the net amount distributed to each minor 5 plaintiff in the settlement is fair and reasonable, in light of the facts of the case, the minor’s 6 specific claim, and recovery in similar cases . . . without regard to the proportion of the 7 total settlement value designated for adult co-plaintiffs or plaintiffs’ counsel . . . .” 8 Robidoux v. Rosengren,

. 9 III. DISCUSSION 10 The proposed settlement provides that Minor Plaintiffs will receive $2500 each. 11 Mot. at 3. Plaintiffs’ counsel states that attorney’s fees and costs shall not be deducted from 12 the amount paid to the three minor plaintiffs. Id.; ECF No. 30-3, Declaration of Douglas F. 13 Fagan (“Fagan Decl.”), ¶ 1. Plaintiff Ms. Logue, guardian ad litem and mother to Minor 14 Plaintiffs, requests that the settlement proceeds to Minor Plaintiffs be deposited into an 15 interest-bearing, federally insured blocked account with a federally insured bank or credit 16 union, from which no withdrawals shall be made without a court order until Minor 17 Plaintiffs reach the age of majority. ECF No. 30-2, Declaration of Heather Logue (“Logue 18 Decl.”), ¶ 5. The parties did not include the other terms of the settlement, including any 19 payment to the non-minor Plaintiffs or attorney’s fees. See Mot. 20 Plaintiff Ms. Logue contends that the proposed settlement to Minor Plaintiffs is 21 reasonable in light of the facts and in comparison with other settlements. Mot. at 6. She 22 also states that Minor Plaintiffs did not require any medical treatment or psychiatric 23 treatment, and that she did her best to shield them from the alleged discriminatory 24 treatment. Logue Decl., ¶¶ 3-4. Ms. Logue states that when she noticed that Defendants 25 came outside to glare at Minor Plaintiffs as they played outside, she “would calmly take 26 her children back inside their home.” Mot. at 5; Logue Decl., ¶ 3. 27 Having considered the facts of the case and settlement amounts approved in similar 28 cases, the Court finds the proposed settlement to Minor Plaintiffs is fair and reasonable. 1 The proposed settlement allows for the certainty of recovery for Minor Plaintiffs, as 2 opposed to the uncertainty associated with litigation. Also, the potential recovery in this 3 case was limited as Minor Plaintiffs were not physically or emotionally injured. Finally, 4 the proposed settlement falls within the range of settlement amounts approved for similar 5 claims in factually similar cases. See Kirkland v. Brighton Place, L.P., No. 18CV1878- 6 MMA (BLM),

, at *2 (S.D. Cal. May 9, 2019) (approving settlement 7 amount of $3000 per minor child allegedly prevented from playing in the common areas 8 of an apartment complex); Guerra v. Madera Mgmt. Co., No. 1:11-CV-01488-LJO, 2012

, at *3 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 17, 2012), report and recommendation adopted, No. 10 1:11-CV-01488-LJO,

(E.D. Cal. Oct. 10, 2012) (finding settlement 11 amount of $2500 per minor child allegedly prevented from playing outside in the common 12 areas of an apartment complex to be fair and reasonable); Bor v. PPC WSSC LLC, No. 11- 13 CV-03430-LHK,

, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2012) (approving 14 compromise amounts of $6500, $2500, and $1000 to minor children allegedly prohibited 15 from playing in the common areas of an apartment complex); Angstman v. Carlsbad 16 Seapoint Resort II, L.P., No. 11CV62 L(WMC),

, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 17 30, 2011) (finding settlement amount of $750 per minor child allegedly subjected to similar 18 discriminatory rules at a vacation resort to be fair and reasonable); Gonzalez v. Diversified 19 Real Prop. Mgmt. & Bus. Servs., Inc., No. SA CV 09-718 PA RNBX,

, 20 at *1-3 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2010) (approving settlement amount of $2500 per minor child 21 allegedly prohibited from playing in the common areas of a condominium complex). 22 Accordingly, the Court finds that a net payment of $2500 to each of the three Minor 23 Plaintiffs is a reasonable settlement. 24 IV. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 25 Based on the foregoing, the Court RECOMMENDS the following: 26 1. Plaintiffs’ motion to confirm minors’ compromise be GRANTED. The Minor 27 Plaintiffs shall receive the following: 28 / / / 1 a. $2500 to L.L. 2 b. $2500 to E.L. 3 c. $2500 to A.L. 4 2. Within seventy-two hours of receipt of the settlement for Minor Plaintiffs, 5 Heather Logue, as guardian ad litem and mother for Minor Plaintiffs, shall 6 deposit the check for the minor children into interest-bearing, federally insured 7 blocked accounts with a federally insured bank or credit union. The blocked 8 accounts are to be opened solely for the benefit of each Minor Plaintiff in this 9 case and such funds placed therein cannot be accessed by anybody other than the 10 respective Minor Plaintiffs upon reaching the age of eighteen. Plaintiff/Guardian 11 Logue shall have no right to access any of the funds in such blocked accounts for 12 any reason. 13 3. Plaintiff/Guardian Logue shall provide a copy of this order to the depository at 14 the time of the deposit. 15 4. No withdrawals of principal or interest may be made from the blocked accounts 16 without a written order under this case name and number, signed by a judge, and 17 bearing the seal of this Court, until the respective minors attain the age of eighteen 18 years. When the respective minor attains the age of eighteen years, the 19 depository, without further order of this Court, is authorized and directed to pay 20 directly to the former minors, upon proper demand, all moneys including interest 21 deposited under this order. 22 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that any written objections to this Report and 23 Recommendation must be filed with the Court and served on all parties no later than 24 December 11, 2019. The document should be captioned “Objections to Report and 25 Recommendation.” 26 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any reply to the objections shall be filed with 27 the Court and served on all parties no later than December 26, 2019. The parties are 28 advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to raise 1 || those objections on appeal of the Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan,

(9th 2 || Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst,

(9th Cir. 1991). 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 ||Dated: November 26, 2019 NO 5 Qe J 6 Honorable Linda Lopez 4 United States Magistrate Judge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28