Azure Manor/Rancho de Paz Homeowners Association v. D.R. Horton, Inc. et al
Filing
143
ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 129 Third Party Defendant's Motion to Place Settlement on the Record and for Determination of Good Faith Settlement, 129 Motion to Deem Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims Fully Executed by M S Concrete, Co., Inc. are GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 9/20/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3
***
4
5
AZURE MANOR/RANCHO DE PAZ
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, et al.,
6
7
8
Case No. 2:15-cv-01623-GMN-VCF
Plaintiffs,
vs.
D.R. HORTON, INC., et al.,
ORDER
Defendants.
9
Before the court are Third Party Defendant's Motion to Place Settlement on the Record and for
10
Determination of Good Faith Settlement (ECF No. 129) Motion to Deem Settlement Agreement and
11
Release of Claims Fully Executed by M S Concrete, Co., Inc. (ECF No. 133).
12
Motion to Deem Settlement Enforceable
13
A.
Relevant Facts
14
This case involves alleged construction defects with common area components of the Azure
15
Manor/Rancho de Paz community. The community was constructed by D.R. Horton, Inc. and U.S. Home
16
Corp., with D.R. Horton, Inc. constructing the Azure Manor section of the community and U.S. Home
17
Corp., constructing the Rancho de Paz section. M S Concrete appears to have been involved with
18
installation of concrete flatwork components on the Rancho de Paz section only. D.R. Horton, Inc. did
19
not assert any claims against M S Concrete in this matter.
20
M S Concrete and U.S. Home Corp. have reached a successful settlement and have agreed to the
21
final terms of a Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims. (ECF No. at 7). Counsel for M S Concrete
22
has not been able to locate a representative of M S Concrete to execute the final Settlement Agreement
23
and Release of Claims. M S Concrete counsel requests that the Court deem the Settlement Agreement
24
and Release of Claims between M S Concrete and U.S. Home Corp., fully executed by M S Concrete.
25
1
1.
Relevant Law
2
Pursuant to Nevada Revised Statute §17.245, “[w]hen a release or a covenant not to sue or not to
3
enforce judgment is given in good faith to one of two or more persons liable in tort for the same injury or
4
the same wrongful death: (a) It does not discharge any of the other tortfeasors from liability for the injury
5
or wrongful death unless its terms so provide, but it reduces the claim against the others to the extent of
6
any amount stipulated by the release or the covenant, or in the amount of the consideration paid for it,
7
whichever is the greater; and (b) It discharges the tortfeasor to whom it is given from all liability for
8
contribution and for equitable indemnity to any other tortfeasor.”
9
The court in The Doctors Co. v. Vincent, stated that, as evidenced by the ruling in In re MGM
10
Grand Hotel Fire Litigation, “the Nevada Federal District Court embrace[s] the following factors in
11
evaluating good-faith issues under NRS 17.245: [1] [t]he amount paid in settlement, [2] the allocation of
12
the settlement proceeds among plaintiffs, [3] the insurance policy limits of settling defendants, [4] the
13
financial condition of settling defendants, and [5] the existence of collusion, fraud or tortious conduct
14
aimed to injure the interests of non-settling defendants.” The Doctors Co. v. Vincent, 120 Nev. 644, 651-
15
52, 98 P.3d 681, 686 (2004)(quoting In re MGM Grand Hotel Fire Litigation, 570 F.Supp. 913, 927
16
(D.Nev.1983)). The court also stated that these factors are not exhaustive, and that the determination of
17
good faith settlement “should be left to the discretion of the trial court based upon all relevant facts
18
available...” Id at 652 (quoting Velsicol Chemical v. Davidson, 107 Nev. 356, 360, 811 P.2d 561, 563
19
(1991)).
20
2.
21
Considering the factors outlined above, the Court grants Third-Party Defendant M S Concrete Co.,
22
Inc.'s Motion to Deem Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims Fully Executed by M S Concrete,
23
Co., Inc. (ECF No. 133).
24
25
Discussion
1
No opposition has been filed. This constitutes consent to the granting of the motion under Local
2
Rule 7-2(d), which states that “[t]he failure of an opposing party to file point and authorities in response
3
to any motion shall constitute a consent to the granting of the motion.”
4
The Court has reviewed the instant motion and finds that the proposed settlement satisfies section
5
17.245's good-faith requirement. The court’s finding is predicated on three of the MGM factors. With
6
regard to the first and second factor, the proposed settlement appears fair and reasonable. (ECF No. 133-
7
1). See MGM Grand Hotel Fire Litig., 570 F. Supp. at 927.
8
Finally, the propose settlement agreement, in the amount of $63,000.00, was apparently reached
9
in good faith because collusion, fraud, and other tortious conduct aimed to injure the interests of non-
10
settling defendants is absent. MGM Grand Hotel Fire Litig., 570 F. Supp. at 927. The proposed settlement
11
was reached after extensive negotiations involving an independent Mediator. (ECF NO. 133 at 7).
Based on the foregoing and all of the relevant facts surrounding the settlement, the undersigned
12
13
finds that the settlement was reached in good faith.
14
Under Local Rule 11-6(a), an attorney who has appeared for a party must be recognized by the
15
court and all the parties as having control of the client's case. Given that M S Concrete's counsel has made
16
several attempts and cannot locate a representative of M S Concrete to sign the settlement agreement, the
17
court deems that the Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims between M S Concrete and U.S. Home
18
Corp., as attached in ECF No. 133-1, is fully executed, and enforceable.
19
Accordingly, and for good cause shown,
20
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Third Party Defendant's Motion to Place Settlement on the
21
Record and for Determination of Good Faith Settlement (ECF No. 129) Motion to Deem Settlement
22
///
23
///
24
///
25
1
Agreement and Release of Claims Fully Executed by M S Concrete, Co., Inc. (ECF No. 133) are
2
GRANTED.
3
DATED this 20th day of September, 2016.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
_________________________
CAM FERENBACH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?