Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 21STCV20446, Date: 2023-08-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV20446    Hearing Date: August 15, 2023    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely.  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

TENTATIVE RULING

MOTION

Defendant Ladrelaron Powell (“Defendant”) moves the Court to consolidate this case with Nerfitte Wanzo v. Dameon Powell (Case No. 21STLC04630) (“Wanzo”) for all purposes.  There is no opposition to the Motion.

ANALYSIS

Los Angeles County Superior Court Rule 3.3, subdivision (g)(1) provides: “Cases may not be consolidated unless they are in the same department.  A motion to consolidate two or more cases may be noticed and heard after the cases, initially filed in different departments, have been related into a single department, or if the cases were already assigned to that department.”  (L.A.S.C. Rules of Court, rule 3.3(g)(1).) In addition, “[b]efore consolidation of a limited case with an unlimited case, the limited case must be reclassified as an unlimited case and the reclassification fee paid. (L.A.S.C. Rules of Court, rule 3.3(g)(3).)

This case has not been related with Wanzo.  In addition, it is in this Court (Spring Street Department 32) and Wanzo is in Spring Street Department 25 as a limited civil case.

Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion to Consolidate is DENIED.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Defendant’s Motion to Consolidate is DENIED.

Defendant shall provide notice of this order and file a proof of service of such.