Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 21STCV42617, Date: 2022-12-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV42617    Hearing Date: December 15, 2022    Dept: 28

Defendants Victor Benavante Varela, Bryan Melgar and Enviroklean Solutions, Inc.’s Motion to Consolidate Cases

Having considered the moving, opposing and reply papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On November 18, 2021, Plaintiff Jesus De La Pena (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Victor Benavante Varela (“Varela”), Robert Andrew Romero, Sr. (“Romero”), Bryan Melgar (“Melgar”) and Enviroklean Solutions, Inc. (“Enviroklean”) for negligence.

On July 1, 2022, Varela, Melgar and Enviroklean filed an answer.

On October 20, 2022, Varela, Melgar and Environklean (“Moving Defendants”) filed a Motion to Consolidate Cases to be heard December 15, 2022. On November 29, 2022, Plaintiff filed an opposition. Moving Defendants filed a reply on December 8, 2022.

Trial is current scheduled for May 18, 2023.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Moving Defendants request the Court consolidate this case with Case No. 22STCV09474, entitled Luis Enrique Martinez Avalos, et al. v. Victor Benavante Varela, et al.

Plaintiff requests the Court deny the motion.

LEGAL STANDARD

According to CCP § 1048, when actions involved a common question or law or fact, it may order a joint hearing or trial, or order all actions consolidated.

Los Angeles County Superior Court Local Rule 3.3(g) provides as follows: “(1) 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. (2) Upon consolidation of cases, the first filed case will be the lead case, unless otherwise ordered by the court. After consolidation, all future papers to be filed in the Consolidated case must be filed only in the case Designated as the lead case”

DISCUSSION

Moving Defendants allege that both cases arise out of the incident and involve common parties to the action. Both cases stem from the same motor vehicle accident; Moving Defendants are Defendants in both actions. They have the same basic questions of fact or law. The cases were deemed related on September 6, 2022. It is within the interest of judicial economy to consolidate these actions.

Plaintiff alleges that Moving Defendants' driver’s liability is the only common question of fact or law. Valera, who was driving the subject vehicle, allegedly read-ended Avalos; Valera’s vehicle then ‘bounced off’ Avalos and hit Plaintiff’s vehicle. Plaintiff says the forces involved are different and that Plaintiff and Avalos’s vehicle never collided. Finally, Plaintiff argues that parties have distinct injuries. None of this shows there is not good cause to consolidate the cases. Parties will still be able to argue their own respective theories and present their own experts; it will just be consolidated so that Moving Defendants do not have to produce the same evidence and arguments multiple times.

The Court grants the motion.

CONCLUSION

Defendants Victor Benavante Varela, Bryan Melgar and Enviroklean Solutions, Inc.’s Motion to Consolidate Cases is GRANTED. Case No. 21STCV42617 and Case No. 22STCV09474 are consolidated, with Case No. 21STCV42617 designated as the lead case.

                Moving Party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Moving Party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.