Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 19STCV09657, Date: 2023-01-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV09657    Hearing Date: January 13, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

1. Background

The present action arises from an automobile collision which occurred on approximately April 5, 2018.  On said date, Carlos Alonso (“Plaintiff”) was a passenger in a taxicab, owned by Access Services, Incorporated (“Defendant Access Services”) and Yellow Taxi, Inc. (“Defendant Yellow Taxi”), and driven by Maria Ortiz (“Defendant Ortiz”).  The subject taxicab was traveling southbound on La Cienega Boulevard in Los Angeles, California when the taxicab collided with a separate motor vehicle, operated by Krishaun Holbert (“Defendant Holbert”).  Plaintiff allegedly suffered personal injuries as a result of the automobile collision.

            On March 20, 2019, Plaintiff initiated the instant action by filing a Complaint against Defendant Access Services, Defendant Yellow Taxi, Defendant Ortiz, Defendant Holbert, County of Los Angeles, and Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (collectively, “Defendants”).  Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges the following causes of action: (1) Negligence; and (2) Negligence—Common Carrier.

            On September 21, 2021, Plaintiff’s action was consolidated with the following two actions, which each arise from the same automobile collision for which Plaintiff’s Complaint concerns: (1) Victoria Elder v. Krishaun Holbert, et al. (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 20STCV13206); and (2) Khaliah Farwell v. Krishaun Holbert, et al. (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 20STCV13191).  Plaintiff’s action was deemed the lead case.

            Defendant Holbert now moves for an Order consolidating the present action with a third case which, similarly, arises from the same automobile collision as Plaintiff’s Complaint.  The third case bears the following caption and case number, Maria Ortiz v. Krishaun Holbert, et al. (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 20STLC02799).

2. Motion to Consolidate Actions For All Purposes

Code of Civil Procedure section 1048 states, in pertinent part: “When actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the actions consolidated and it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a).) 

California Rules of Court, Rule 3.350 provides, “[a] notice of motion to consolidate must: (A) [l]ist all named parties in each case, the names of those who have appeared, and the names of their respective  attorneys of record; (B) [c]ontain the captions of all the cases sought to be consolidated, with the lowest numbered case shown first; and (C) [b]e filed in each case sought to be consolidated.”  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.350, subd. (a)(1).)  Rule 3.350 further provides, “[t]he motion to consolidate: (A) [i]s deemed a single motion for the purposes of determining the appropriate filing fee, but memorandums, declarations, and other supporting papers must be filed only in the lowest numbered case; (B) [m]ust be served on all attorneys of record and all nonrepresented parties in all of the cases sought to be consolidated; and (C) [m]ust have a proof of service filed as part of the motion.”  (Id., rule 3.350, subd. (a)(2).) 

Further, Los Angeles County Court Rules, Rule 3.3(g) states, “[c]ases 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.”  (Super. Ct. L.A. County, Local Rules, rule 3.3, subd. (g).)  Los Angeles County Court Rules, Rule 3.3(g) additionally states, “[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.”  (Ibid.)

As noted above, Defendant Holbert presently moves for an Order consolidating the present action with Maria Ortiz v. Krishaun Holbert, et al. (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 20STLC02799) (hereinafter, “Ortiz Action”) for all purposes.  The Court is unable to permit consolidation of the present action and the Ortiz Action at this juncture because Defendant Holbert’s Motion to Consolidate remains procedurally deficient. 

First, Defendant Holbert’s Notice of Motion fails to comply with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.350.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.350, subd. (a)(1).)   Defendant Holbert’s Notice of Motion fails to “[l]ist all named parties in each case, the names of those who have appeared, and the names of their respective  attorneys of record[.]” (Ibid.)  Additionally, Defendant Holbert has failed to file the Notice of Motion “in each case sought to be consolidated.”  (Ibid.)  Defendant Holbert has filed the Notice of Motion in the present case only, and has failed to file the Notice of Motion in the Ortiz Action.

Second, the Court concludes Defendant Holbert has failed to comply with Los Angeles County Court Rules, Rule 3.3(g) prior to requesting consolidation of the present action and the Ortiz Action, by virtue of the instant Motion to Consolidate Actions.  As a preliminary matter, the Court observes that the present action is an unlimited action, which has been assigned to Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse, and the Ortiz Action is a limited action, which has been assigned to Department 26 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The Court finds Defendant Holbert’s Motion defective as Defendant Holbert has failed to ensure that the present action and the Ortiz Action have been deemed related into a single department, prior to noticing the present Motion to Consolidate Actions.  (Super. Ct. L.A. County, Local Rules, rule 3.3, subd. (g) [“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 . . . .”].)  While a Notice of Related Case was filed in the Ortiz Action on November 15, 2021, the Court has made no ruling thereon, and the cases remain in separate departments.  (Leos Decl., ¶ 4, Ex. C.)  The Court finds Defendant Holbert’s Motion defective for an additional reason.  While Defendant Holbert presently requests consolidation of an unlimited case (the present action) and a limited case (the Ortiz Action), Defendant Holbert has failed to ensure the reclassification of the Ortiz Action (from a limited action to an unlimited action) and has failed to pay the reclassification fee.  (Super. Ct. L.A. County, Local Rules, rule 3.3, subd. (g).) 

Based upon the aforementioned procedural deficiencies, the Court is unable to grant the relief requested at this juncture.  Defendant Holbert’s Motion to Consolidate Actions For All Purposes is DENIED, without prejudice.

Defendant Holbert is ordered to give notice.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

·       Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement.

·       If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.  The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting. 

·       Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.  You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue. 

·       If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.

Dated this 13^th day of January, 2023