Judge: Christian R. Gullon, Case: 24PSCV00840, Date: 2024-05-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24PSCV00840    Hearing Date: May 6, 2024    Dept: O

Tentative Ruling

STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY’s (“State Farm”) MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE COMPLAINT-ININTERVENTION is GRANTED.

Background

This case arises from a motor vehicle accident.

On March 18, 2024, Plaintiff MARTIN JAIME GONZALEZ MORENO filed suit against SAMANTHA MIRANDA DE LEON for ‘Motor Vehicle’ cause of action.

On April 4, 2024, State Farm filed the instant motion.

Legal Standard

This Motion is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) Section 387 and Labor Code Section 3853. (Motion p. 2.) CCP section 387 provides, “[t]he Court shall, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the action or proceeding if . . . [a] provision of law confers an unconditional right to intervene.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 387, subd. (d)(1)(A).)   

Labor Code § 3853 provides an insurance company seeking indemnity of workers compensation payments against a third-party tortfeasor an unconditional right to intervene.  (Mar v. Sakti Internat. Corp. (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1780, 1784-1785.)  Labor Code § 3853 states, when an action is brough against a third-party tortfeasor “by either [an] employer or employee, the other may, at any time before trial on the facts, join as a party plaintiff or shall consolidate his action, if brought independently.”  (Lab. Code, § 3853.)  Section 3850 of the Labor Code defines “Employer” to include the employer’s insurer.  (Lab. Code, § 3850, subd. (b); see Bishop v. Silva (1991) 234 Cal.App.3d 1317, 1324.)  Labor Code § 3853 states that an insurer may intervene in the action “at any time before trial on the facts”.  (Lab. Code, § 3853.) 

Discussion

State Farm seeks to intervene pursuant to Labor Code Sections 3852 and 3853. State Farm (Plaintiffs’ employer's workers' compensation carrier) can intervene because it has to pay workers' compensation benefits to Plaintiffs as a result of the accident, meaning it has a direct financial interest in the matter and is a necessary party to the action.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, the motion is granted.[1]