Klep v. County of Siskiyou

Opinion

----oo0oo---- RENEE KLEP, individually and as No. 2:23-cv-274 WBS SCR successor-in-interest to DARIN KLEP, Decedent; A.K. a minor by her Guardian Ad Litem, RENEE KLEP; ORDER APPROVING MINOR’S COMPROMISE Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF SISKIYOU, a municipal entity; CITY OF MT. SHASTA, a municipal entity; CHRIS STOCK, an individual; RICHARD EVANS, an individual; WALTER MOORE, an individual; and JUAN CASANOVA, an individual; Defendants. ----oo0oo---- Plaintiffs Renee Klep and her daughter Ayla Klep (“A.K.”) brought this suit against the County of Siskiyou, the City of Mt. Shasta, and four law enforcement officers (collectively, “defendants”) following the shooting of decedent Darin Klep. (See Compl. ¶¶ 1-8, 13-27 (Docket No. 1).) The court previously appointed Renee Klep as A.K.’s guardian ad litem. (Docket No. 4.) After the parties settled for a total of $250,000.00, A.K., by and through her guardian ad litem and mother Renee Klep, moved for approval of the compromise of her claims. (Docket No. 36.) Defendants do not oppose the instant motion. (Docket Nos. 37-38.) The court held a hearing on the motion on June 9, 2025. (Docket No. 39.) The settlement of the claims of a minor is subject to approval by the court. See L.R. 202(b). The party moving for approval of the settlement must provide the court “information as may be required to enable the [c]ourt to determine the fairness of the settlement or compromise.” See id.(b)(2); see also Robidoux v. Rosengren, 638 F.3d 1177, 1179 (9th Cir. 2011) (directing district courts “to safeguard the interests of minor plaintiffs” by “determin[ing] whether the net amount distributed to each minor plaintiff in the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable”). District courts must “limit the scope of their review to the question whether the net amount distributed to each minor plaintiff in the settlement is fair and reasonable, in light of the facts of the case, the minor’s specific claim, and recovery in similar cases.” Id. at 1181-82. Under the proposed settlement, A.K. will receive a gross amount of $50,000.00. (Decl. of Philip J. Kaplan (“Kaplan Decl.”) ¶ 27 (Docket No. 36 at 11-18).) Plaintiffs’ prior counsel, Nadrich & Cohen (“N & C”), and current counsel, the Law Offices of Philip J. Kaplan (“Kaplan”), will collectively receive $12,500.00 in total attorney’s fees from A.K.’s share, which will be split among them such that N & C receives $5,000.00, and Kaplan receives $7,500.00. (Id. ¶ 28.) A.K. will therefore receive a net amount of $38,500.00. (Id. ¶¶ 27-28.) Renee Klep will receive $200,000.00 in gross recovery. (Id. ¶ 27.) From that amount, N & C will receive $32,000.00 in attorneys’ fees, and Kaplan will receive $48,000.00 in attorney’s fees. (Id. ¶ 28.) In addition, $39,219.01 for costs and expenses will be assessed against only Renee Klep’s share, leaving her with a net amount of $80,780.99. (Id. ¶¶ 29-30.) The court, after considering all of the relevant submissions, finds that this settlement is “fair, reasonable, and in the best interest” of A.K. See Popp v. United States, No. 1:23-cv-1221 WBS EPG, 2025 WL 621560, at *1-2 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2025). The settlement is for a substantial sum, considering the injuries allegedly suffered by the minor plaintiff, and it is not certain that plaintiffs would recover that amount against defendants if the case proceeded to trial. (See Kaplan Decl. ¶¶ 18-22.) The court notes that the total amount plaintiffs’ counsel will receive as attorneys’ fees from A.K.’s share amounts to 25% of her recovery, which is the “benchmark” for attorneys’ fees in contingency cases involving minors in the Eastern District of California. See Chance v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., No. 1:15-cv-1889 DAD JLT, 2016 WL 3538345, at *2-3 (E.D. Cal. June 29, 2016) (collecting cases). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion for approval of minor’s compromise (Docket No. 36) be, and the same hereby is, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT: 1. The total settlement in the amount of $250,000.00, with gross settlement proceeds of $200,000.00 allocated to Renee Klep, and $50,000.00 to A.K., is approved. 2. A twenty-five percent (25%) contingency fee on the $50,000.00 allocated to A.K. ($12,500.00) is approved. 3. From settlement funds received by Kaplan, plaintiffs’ current counsel, Kaplan is directed to disburse from its trust account the following sum as directed herein: (a) $38,500.00 to be deposited into a blocked bank account insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation until the minor reaches majority at Chase Bank, 974 Dana Drive, Redding, CA 96003, in the name of “Renee Klep, as guardian ad litem of Ayla Klep.” (b) Within forty-eight (48) hours of settlement funds clearing the trust account of the Law Offices of Philip J. Kaplan, Renee Klep and/or Kaplan must deposit the amount of $38,500.00 into the blocked account as set forth herein. (c) Renee Klep and/or Kaplan must deliver to the depository of the above funds, Chase Bank, a copy of this Order. Renee Klep and/or Kaplan are to place the balance in the blocked account and to file a copy of the receipt with this court within fifteen (15) days of the deposit. (d) The proceeds of settlement or judgment deposited in the blocked account belonging to a minor, as described above, may be withdrawn only as follows: No withdrawals of principal or interest may be made from the blocked account without a further written order under this case name and number, signed by a judicial officer, and bearing the seal of this court, until the ee EI I EIEN I OS IE OE

minor attains the age of eighteen (18) years. When the individual minor named herein attains the age of 18 years, the depository, without further order of this court, is authorized and directed to pay by check or draft directly to the former minor, upon proper demand, all moneys including interest deposited under this order. The money on deposit is not subject to escheat. 2, Renee Klep is authorized to execute any and all documents reasonably necessary to carry out the terms of the settlement. 3. Bond is not required. (See Docket No. 36-1.) 4, The parties are directed to file disposition documents within sixty (60) days of the date of this Order. Dated: June 10, 2025 bet¢ ak. 1d UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE