Judge: Daniel S. Murphy, Case: 24STCV01480, Date: 2024-10-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV01480    Hearing Date: October 14, 2024    Dept: 32

BACKGROUND

            On January 19, 2024, Plaintiff John Hensley filed this action against Edward Joseph Rachal (Rachal) and numerous other defendants. The complaint asserts causes of action for (1) negligence, (2) negligent hiring, (3) vicarious liability, (4) premises liability, and (5) negligent undertaking.

            The complaint stems from injuries Plaintiff suffered after being shot by Rachal, a security guard working near a parking garage located at 832 South Francisco Street, Los Angeles. Besides Rachal, the defendants consist of individuals and entities that allegedly hired Rachal, employed security at the location of the incident, or owned or operated the parking garage.

            Prior to this action, on September 28, 2022, Plaintiff filed another action titled John Hensley v. Edward Joseph Rachal, et al. (22STCV31707). That complaint contained causes of action for (1) negligence, (2) negligent hiring, (3) assault, (4) battery, (5) negligent infliction of emotional distress, (6) intentional infliction of emotional distress, and (7) punitive damages. The complaint arose from the same incident, i.e., Rachal shooting Plaintiff.

            On September 17, 2024, Defendant L&R Auto Parks, Inc. (erroneously sued as Joe’s Auto Parks 212 E. 7th – Spoleto, LLC) filed the instant motion to consolidate the two actions. Plaintiff filed a notice of non-opposition on October 1, 2024.

LEGAL STANDARD

While a notice of motion to consolidate must “[b]e filed in each case sought to be consolidated,” the “memorandums, declarations, and other supporting papers must be filed only in the lowest numbered case.” (Cal. Rules of Ct., Rule 3.350(a)(1)(C), (a)(2)(A).) In other words, the motion itself must be heard in the earlier case. Furthermore, “[u]nless otherwise provided in the order granting the motion to consolidate, the lowest numbered case in the consolidated case is the lead case.” (Id., Rule 3.350(b).)   

DISCUSSION

            This Court cannot hear the merits of the motion to consolidate because the motion must be heard in the lowest numbered case, 22STCV31707. (See Cal. Rules of Ct., Rule 3.350(a)(2)(A).)

CONCLUSION

            Defendant L&R Auto Parks, Inc.’s motion to consolidate is DENIED.