Judge: Douglas W. Stern, Case: 22STCV04178, Date: 2023-01-30 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV04178    Hearing Date: January 30, 2023    Dept: 68

Vanessa Moriel, et al. v. State Farm General Insurance and Trish Bowe, Case No. 22STCV04178

Ex Parte Application seeking dismissal of Defendant Trish Bowe

Defendants have filed an ex parte application seeking an order dismissing Defendant Trish Bowe, with prejudice.  Plaintiff does not want to file a dismissal, although Plaintiff repeatedly has stated to Defendants that Trish Bowe is not a party to the action.  Now the Court is asked to weigh in on an ex parte basis.

On February 2, 2022 Plaintiff filed this action naming as defendants State Farm Gen. Ins. Co. AND TRISH BOWE.  Defendant Trish Bowe appeared in this action when, among other things, she (and State Farm Gen. Ins. Co.) filed a demurrer to the Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint on September 29, 2022.

Plaintiff notes that the Third Amended Complaint filed January 9, 2023 no longer makes any allegations against Defendant Trish Bowe.  Therefore, Defendants requested that Plaintiff file a dismissal of Trish Bowe.

On January 10, 2023 Plaintiff articulated her rationale for refusing to dismiss a person that had been expressly named, appeared, and no longer is named in the operative complaint.

“Agent Bowe is not a party to the operative Third Amended Complaint. Agent Bowe is no longer a party to the action.”  (1/10/23 at 2:36 p.m.)  “She’s no longer named, identified, or listed as a defendant by Plaintiffs. If you have some authority to demonstrate your point, then please circulate to us.”  (1/10/2023 at 3:28 p.m.)  “You are assuming Agent Bowe is a party to the action, but she is not. Agent Bowe has never filed an answer. Agent Bowe is not named, identified, or listed as a defendant in the operative Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs are not in a position, nor are they convinced, to dismiss a non-party from the action.”  (1/10/023 at 3:57 p.m.)  “Plaintiffs are not convinced by your arguments or authority. Plaintiffs are not in a position to dismiss a non-party from the action.”  (1/10/2023 at 4:11 p.m.)

No exigency exists.  The Court shall not address this on an ex parte basis.  Instead, the Defendant may file this as a noticed motion and may seek all appropriate relief.  Both parties shall then have a full opportunity to provide the Court their points and authorities supporting their respective positions.

The ex parte application is denied without prejudice to the matter being brought forth as a noticed motion.