An insurer has offered money after a child’s injury. In California, agreement on a dollar amount does not by itself finish the court-approval process for a minor’s disputed claim. A procedure often called a minor’s compromise lets the court review the proposed settlement and arrangements for the child’s money.
This article provides general information about California state-court procedures, checked on 15 October 2026. It is not legal advice, does not assess any claim, and does not describe the rules in other US states or the UK.
Does approval matter if nobody has filed a lawsuit?
Yes. California Courts’ guidance for form MC-350 covers settlements of a court case or another claim for money on behalf of a minor. The form expressly includes a claim that is not the subject of a pending action. Court review therefore is not limited to cases already headed for trial.
This is a settlement-approval procedure, not a finding that someone caused the injury. Whether a child has a viable injury claim is a separate question. An offer also does not establish what the claim is worth.
What does the court review?
California Rule of Court 7.950 requires a verified petition disclosing all information bearing on whether the proposed settlement or disposition is reasonable. Ordinarily, the petition uses MC-350, subject to the expedited procedure described below.
The official form asks about the incident, injuries, treatment, recovery, proposed settlement, medical expenses, fees and the proposed handling of the proceeds. These details help explain the proposal beyond its headline amount. In practical terms, the amount offered and the amount remaining for the child after proposed payments are different figures.
A hypothetical offer of $20,000 is not necessarily $20,000 available to the child. Proposed medical payments, legal fees and expenses may affect the balance. That illustration is arithmetic, not an estimate of a reasonable settlement or permissible deductions.
Is a lawyer’s agreed fee automatically approved?
No. Rule 7.955 generally requires the court to apply a reasonable-fee standard when approving fees payable from the child’s recovery, unless the fee agreement was approved in advance. The rule calls for consideration of the representation agreement and relevant circumstances, and a supporting attorney declaration addressing applicable factors.
A percentage in a fee agreement is therefore not, by itself, a guarantee of what the court will allow. Nor does the rule establish one universally approved percentage for every child-injury settlement.
Must the child attend a hearing?
Under Rule 7.952, the petitioner and child must attend the hearing unless the court excuses their personal appearance for good cause. The court can also require witnesses, including a treating or examining physician. Families should not assume that submitting paperwork automatically excuses attendance.
There is a separate expedited route. Rule 7.950.5 permits MC-350EX only when all its conditions are satisfied, including representation by a California-authorised attorney. Conditions also address liens, attorney independence, trusts and settlement amounts. A small settlement alone does not establish eligibility.
A qualifying expedited petition is generally decided without a hearing, but an objection, a request or the court’s decision can lead to one. “Expedited” does not mean approval is automatic.
Can a parent freely spend the settlement money?
The court-approved arrangement matters. A blocked account is one possible arrangement, rather than an ordinary family spending account. The Tuolumne Superior Court explanation identifies blocked funds as the minor’s money and explains that withdrawals require court authorisation. Its filing locations and scheduling details are local, not statewide instructions.
California’s MC-357 guidance describes a petition requesting permission to withdraw blocked funds. A parent’s wish to use the money is not itself permission. The actual order and account terms control access, including any provision addressing the child reaching adulthood.
Questions that need individual legal review
Who may represent the child, whether a proposed release protects the child’s interests, unresolved medical reimbursement demands, and the right arrangement for future payments all depend on the circumstances. This explainer cannot resolve those questions or recommend accepting an offer.
A California lawyer can assess the proposed settlement and applicable deadlines. The court’s clerk or self-help centre can explain available procedural assistance; California Courts also provides a guide to finding current court forms. This article does not establish or extend any filing deadline.
Featured photograph: Gray Clary / Unsplash. Illustrative image; the people pictured are not identified as claimants.
