Judge: David A. Rosen, Case: 22GDCV01108, Date: 2023-03-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22GDCV01108    Hearing Date: March 24, 2023    Dept: E

Hearing Date: 03/24/2023 

Case No:         22GDCV01108                                                                     

Trial Date:       Not Set

Case Name:     HOMA KANGARLOO vs. SOUTH COAST PLAZA 

Tentative Ruling on Motion for Change of Venue

Moving Party:             Defendant South Coast Plaza

Responding Party:       None  

Proof of service timely filed (CRC 317(b)):¿¿ ok¿ 

Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013(a)):¿¿¿¿ok¿ 

16/+5 day¿lapse (CCP §1005):¿¿ok¿¿ 

RELIEF REQUESTED: 

Defendant South Coast Plaza requests the Court to order this matter transferred to the Orange

County Superior Court, Central Justice Center for further proceedings. 

BACKGROUND: 

On December 27, 2022, Plaintiff Homa Kangarloo (“Plaintiff”) filed a form complaint against Defendant South Coast Plaza (“Defendant”) alleging three causes of action: (1) general negligence; (2) premises liability; and (3) infliction of emotional distress.  Plaintiff states this court is the proper venue because Plaintiff resides in its jurisdictional area.  (Complaint ¶ 8.) The Complaint does not state specific allegations giving rise to the action.

On February 21, 2023, Defendant filed a Motion for Change of Venue to Orange County Superior Court, Central Justice Center.

No opposition has been filed.

ANALYSIS: 

Legal Standard 

California Code of Civil Procedure section 395, subdivision (a) provides, in relevant part, “[i]f the action is for injury to person or personal property or for death from wrongful act or negligence, the superior court in either the county where the injury occurs or the injury causing death occurs or the county where the defendants, or some of them reside at the commencement of the action, is a proper court for the trial of the action . . . .” 

California Code of Civil Procedure section 395.5 provides, in relevant part, “[a] corporation or association may be sued in the county where . . . the obligation or liability arises . . . or in the county where the principal place of business of such corporation is situated, subject to the power of the court to change the place of trial as in other cases.” 

California Code of Civil Procedure section 396b, subdivision (a) provides, in relevant part, “[i]f an action . . . is commenced in a court having jurisdiction of the subject matter thereof, other than the court designated as the proper court for trial thereof, . . . the action may, notwithstanding, be tried in the court where commenced, unless the defendant, at the time he or she answers, demurs, or moves to strike, or at his or her option, without answering, demurring, or moving to strike and within the time otherwise allowed to respond to the complaint, files with the clerk, a notice of motion for an order transferring the action . . . to the proper court . . . .” 

Discussion 

The Complaint states this court is the proper venue because Plaintiff resides in its jurisdictional area.  (Complaint ¶ 8.)  Also, the Complaint alleges Plaintiff sustained personal injuries from Defendant, but the Complaint does not state any specific allegations giving rise to the action.  (Complaint ¶ 11.)  Defendant is a private shopping mall in Costa Mesa, Orange County with its principal place of business the same.  (Declaration of Mouradian ¶ 6.)  Without specific allegation giving rise to the action, the only conceivable way Defendant could have caused injury to Plaintiff would be on its premise since Defendant is a shopping mall.  Further, Counsel for Plaintiff stated that he will not oppose Defendant’s Motion.  (Mouradian Decl. ¶ 5; Ex. “A”.)

Tentative Ruling:

Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s Motion for Change of Venue to Orange County Superior Court, Central Justice Center should be GRANTED.  (CCP sections 395, 395.5, and 396(b).)

The parties are to equally split the transfer fees.