Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 21STCV04333, Date: 2022-12-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV04333    Hearing Date: December 12, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

1. Background

Plaintiff Peter Dang (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants City of Los Angeles, NTI-CA, Inc. dba NTI Ground Trans, Marriot International, Inc. dba Los Angeles Airport Marriot, and Naville Andrew McGlover for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident.  On May 5, 2021, Plaintiff filed an amendment to complaint naming Marriott Hotel Services, Inc. as Doe 1.   The City of Los Angeles and NTI-CA, Inc. filed their answer to the complaint on April 30, 2021, and Marriott Hotel Services, Inc. filed its answer on May 20, 2021. 

At this time, Defendants City of Los Angeles, NTI-CA, Inc., and Marriott Hotel Services, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”) seek leave to file a cross-complaint against Alejandra Nevares (“Nevares”) for equitable indemnity, implied indemnity, and declaratory relief.  The motion is unopposed. 

2. Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint

A cross-complaint against any of the parties who filed the initial complaint or cross-complaint against the cross-complainant must be filed before or at the same time as the answer to the initial complaint or cross-complaint, which answer must be filed within 30 days of service of the complaint or cross-complaint.  (CCP §§ 412.20(a)(3), 428.50(a), 432.10.)  Any other cross-complaint may be filed at any time before the court has set a trial date.  (CCP §428.50(b).) 

If a party fails to file a cross-complaint within the time limits described above, he or she must obtain permission from the court to file the cross-complaint.  (CCP §§ 426.50, 428.50(c).)  Leave to file a mandatory cross-complaint must be granted absent bad faith.  Silver Organizations, Ltd. v. Frank (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 94, 99.  Leave to file a permissive cross-complaint need only be granted in the interest of justice.  §428.50(c).

Here, Defendants assert that Plaintiff is alleging he was injured when the rear driver’s side door of the vehicle he was driving was struck by a shuttle bus at the Los Angeles International Airport.  Defendants provide that Plaintiff was working as a driver for the ride share service Lyft and was dropping off Nevares at the time of the incident.  Defendants assert that the accident occurred when Nevares opened the door of Plaintiff’s vehicle directly into the path of the shuttle bus.  Defendants argue that the interests of justice would be served by allowing Defendants to file a cross-complaint against Nevares for the accident. 

The complaint and cross-complaint arise from the same incident and should be litigated together.  There is no evidence that Defendants have been dilatory in seeking to file the cross-complaint.  Further, trial in this matter is currently set for August 30, 2023, such that Nevares will have sufficient time to respond to the cross-complaint and prepare for trial.  No party otherwise establishes prejudice in connection with allowing Defendants leave to file the proposed cross-complaint. 

Defendants’ motion for leave to file a cross-complaint is granted.  Defendants are ordered to file a separate copy of the cross-complaint within five days. 

Defendants are 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 12^th day of December 2022