Adriana Christine Medina v. City of Culver City, 2:23-cv-00704

Plaintiffs brought a civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 following the fatal police shooting of Guillermo Medina, who was reportedly experiencing a mental health crisis.
Plaintiffs include Medina’s children, one of whom—J.G.M.—is a minor represented by a guardian ad litem.
The parties reached a settlement for a gross sum of $4,500,000, to be divided equally among the four Plaintiffs and their attorneys.
Plaintiffs’ counsel originally sought a 40% contingency fee from J.G.M.’s share, per a retainer agreement; the court found this amount too high given the circumstances.
The court reviewed and approved the settlement as to the minor J.G.M., reducing attorneys’ fees to 25% to better safeguard J.G.M.’s interests.
The settlement for J.G.M. will be structured as an annuity, with a net amount of $843,750 after attorneys’ fees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the proposed settlement for minor J.G.M. should be approved as fair and reasonable	The settlement is in J.G.M.’s best interests and fair under the circumstances	No opposition	Settlement approved as fair and reasonable
Whether attorneys’ fees of 40% of J.G.M.’s recovery are appropriate	Retainer allows 40% contingency	No opposition, but court oversight necessary	Fee reduced to 25% to protect minor’s interests
Whether separate court approval is needed for Andrew G. Silva’s (now adult) settlement	Only J.G.M. requires minor approval due to age of majority	No dispute	Court need only approve J.G.M.’s portion
Structure and timing of payment to J.G.M.	Allocation according to settlement structure	No opposition	Annuity for J.G.M. and payment to counsel approved

Robidoux v. Rosengren, 638 F.3d 1177 (9th Cir. 2011) (Court has a special duty to ensure settlements for minors are fair and reasonable)
Dacanay v. Mendoza, 573 F.2d 1075 (9th Cir. 1978) (Court must ensure minor's settlement is in best interests)