DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26PB-0033398·shasta·Civil·Minor Compromise
Hearing about 2 months agoCONTINUED

IN RE KOSOVAN, ET AL.

Three Petitions to Approve Minor Compromise

Hearing date
Jul 6, 2026
Department
64
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Parties

PetitionerAlexandra Kosovan
OtherMichelle Kosovan
OtherMark Kosovan
OtherMatthew Kosovan

Ruling

CASE NUMBER: 26PB-0033398 Tentative Ruling on Three Petitions to Approve Minor Compromise: Alexandra Kosovan seeks an order approving the compromise of claims on behalf of her minor children: Michelle Kosovan, Mark Kosovan, and Matthew Kosovan. California Rules of Court, Rule 7.950 states that a petition for court approval of a minor’s compromise must contain a full disclosure of all information that has any bearing upon the reasonableness of the compromise. The Petition provides the required information. Considering the nature of the minors’ injuries and full recovery, the Court is prepared to find that the settlements are in the best interest of the minors, if the voir dire process is completed to the Court’s satisfaction.

The Court notes this is not an expedited petition brought on Judicial Council Form MC-350EX. See CRC Rule 7.950.5. Hearing is needed on the Petition before it can be approved. The person seeking approval of the settlement on behalf of the minors and the minors are required to appear at the hearing, unless good cause is presented for their non-appearance. CRC Rule 7.952. The Petitioner and minors are required to appear. Counsel will voir dire the Petitioner about the terms of the settlements, any other potential sources to increase the settlement amount, whether the minors have fully recovered and whether the Petitioner understands that once approved, the settlement is final and binding on the minors. An appearance by the Petitioner and the minors is necessary on today’s calendar.

MCCAIN VS. EST OF RICHARD CARL RIPLEY, ET AL.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share