UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 28, 2009
DONNA M. MENIEFIELD, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
MORENO VALLEY CITY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dean D. Pregerson United States District Judge
[Ex Parte Petition filed on June 30, 2009]
ORDER DENYING EX PARTE PETITION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF FUNDS FROM MINOR'S ACCOUNT AND TO RELEASE BLOCKED ACCOUNT
Petitioner Shannon Nolley, as parent and Guardian ad Litem of Dante Meniefield, Jr. ("Minor"), has filed an Ex Parte Petition for Withdrawal of Funds from Minor's Account and to Release Blocked Account.
The blocked account at issue was established as a result of a compromise and settlement of Minor's claim on July 16, 2003. (Order Granting Pet. for Compromise of Disputed Claim of Minor, Docket No. 43.) The court-approved settlement provided that "the net settlement, $596,417.07, shall be deposited in an annuity in Dante Meniefield, Jr.'s name, to be funded by Allstate Life Insurance Company, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, and American General Life Insurance Company, in accordance with the terms and payment schedule" attached to and incorporated in the Order as Exhibit A. (Id. 2:12-17.) The payment schedule provided that Allstate Life Insurance Company would make monthly payments of $700.00 for sixteen years, terminating just before Minor reaches the age of majority. (Id., Exh. A.) Petitioner now asserts that "[t]hrough mistake and inadvertence, the $700.00 per month was placed in a blocked account by my previous attorneys," and that, in fact, the account "was intended by the parties to be used for the minor's child support." (Ex Parte Pet. 2:21-25.)
The Court finds nothing in the court-approved settlement suggesting that the monthly payments from the Allstate Life Insurance Company annuity were intended to be a form of "child support" accessible to Petitioner. Furthermore, while the Ex Parte Petition is styled as a petition seeking withdrawal of funds from the account, it actually asks the Court to remove the block on the account and grant Petitioner access to the accrued funds, which now amount to more than $39,000. The Court therefore finds that good cause for removal of the block on the account has not been shown.
Accordingly, the Ex Parte Petition is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.