Judge: Curtis A. Kin, Case: 24STCP01486, Date: 2024-11-21 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCP01486 Hearing Date: November 21, 2024 Dept: 86
Date: 11/21/24 (1:30 PM)
Case: Jeffrey Prang v. Los Angeles County Assessment Appeals
Board No. 1V (24STCP01486)
TENTATIVE RULING:
Respondent Los Angeles County Assessment Appeals Board’s
Motion to Consolidate is DENIED.
Respondent seeks to consolidate the instant case, Jeffrey
Prang v. Los Angeles County Assessment Appeals Board No. 1V (Case No. 24STCP01486)
(“Prang Petition”) with Grand Pacific 8155, LLC v. County of Los Angeles (Case
No. 24STCV11649) (“Grand Pacific Action”), currently assigned to the Hon. Wendy
Chang in Department 36.
The two cases involve common questions of fact, specifically
the validity of ad valorem property tax assessed value for the real property
assessed by respondent Los Angeles County Assessment Appeals Board. (Parker
Decl. ¶¶ 3, 4.) However, under Local Rule 3.3(g)(1), the cases cannot be
consolidated because the cases have not been related into a single department.
Although County of Los Angeles (“County”) filed a Notice of Related Case in the
Grand Pacific Action, County did not serve or file a Notice of Related Case in
the instant Prang Petition, as required by Rule of Court 3.300(d). Even if County
had filed a Notice of Related Case in the instant Prang Petition, the Grand
Pacific Action cannot be assigned to Department 86, as actions for refund of
property taxes are not assigned to writs and receivers departments. (See Local
Rule 2.8.) Accordingly, because Department 86 does not hear actions for refund
for property taxes, consolidation cannot occur under Local Rule 3.3(g)(1).
The motion is DENIED.