Fox v. Kovacs

— 1 — 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA — 3 — 4 Marcella Fox, Case No. 2:24-cv-00047-CDS-NJK 5 Plaintiff Order on Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement 6 v. 7 Casa Vegas Adult Condominium Association, [ECF No. 11] 8 Defendant — 9 — 10 Defendant Casa Vegas Adult Condominiums Association moves for Determination of 11 Good Faith Settlement pursuant to NRS § 17.245. Mot., ECF No. 11. The court held a hearing on 12 the motion on May 1, 2024. Mins., ECF No. 33. Pro se plaintiff Marcella Fox, and counsel for 13 defendant Casa Vegas Adult Condominium Association (“the Association”), Troy Isaacson, both 14 appeared.1 Id. Having considered the motion, the representations of the parties made during the 15 hearing on this motion, I hereby make the following findings and conclusions of law: 16 1. The parties were afforded the opportunity to fully brief the motion. Ms. Fox did not 17 file an opposition and confirmed on the record during the hearing that she has no objection to 18 the motion. 19 2. The motion properly set forth the relevant factors in evaluating motions for good faith 20 settlement determinations as discussed in In re MGM Grand Hotel Fire Litigation, 570 F. Supp. 913 , 21 927 (D. Nev. 1983). Those factors, which are non-exhaustive, include: (1) the amount paid in 22 settlement, (2) the allocation of the settlement proceeds to the plaintiff, (3) the insurance policy 23 limits of settling defendant, (4) the financial condition of settling defendant, and (5) the 24 existence of collusion, fraud or tortious conduct aimed to injure the interests of non-settling 25 defendants. See The Doctors Co. v. Vincent, 98 P.3d 681, 686 (Nev. 2004) (quoting In re MGM, 570 F. 26 Supp. at 927). 1 Fox appeared via video on Zoom. 1 3. Here, the amount paid in settlement was $10,000.00. This amount was based upon 2|| the Association’s proportional share of liability, if any, and is appropriate given the claims and 3} allegations made. A settlement is in good faith so long as it is not “disproportionately lower than [the settling defendant’s] fair share of damages.” See Velsicol Chem. Corp. v. Davidson, 811 P.2d 561, 5 ]| 564 (Nev. 1991). As set forth in the motion, the allegations against the Association relate to the common areas of the community, and do not affect or relate to Fox’s remaining claims. 7 4. Further, the Association is fully funding the settlement, and the amount is lower than the community’s insurance deductible. The funds come directly from Association members who each pay their proportional share of the settlement. 10 5. Finally, there is no evidence of collusion, fraud, or tortious conduct by the settling parties. 12 Having considered the MGM factors, and incorporating the other findings made on the record during the hearing on the motion, I find that plaintiff Marcella Fox and defendant Casa 14|| Vegas Adult Condominiums Association reached a good faith settlement in accordance with the provisions of Nev. Rev. Stat. § 17.245 . 16 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant’s motion for determination of good faith 17|| settlement [ECF No. 11] is GRANTED. 18 Dated: May 3, 2024 / / 19 LZ 50 kha —<—— / Yptited States District Judge / — 22 — — 23 — — 24 — — 25 — — 26 —