Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 22STCV21384, Date: 2023-02-23 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV21384    Hearing Date: February 23, 2023    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION

MOVING PARTY: Cross-Defendant Eiko Global, LLC (“Moving Defendant”)[1]

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff

The Court has considered the moving, opposition and reply papers. 

BACKGROUND

            The currently operative first amended complaint (the “FAC”) alleges: (1) strict liability and tort; (2) product liability; and (negligence).

Moving Defendant filed a motion to reclassify this matter as a limited civil case (the “Motion”) on the grounds that Plaintiff’s total maximum recovery will necessarily be under $25,000. 

DISCUSSION

Under California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 403.040, subdivision (a), a defendant or cross-defendant may file a motion for reclassification within the time allowed for that party to respond to the initial pleading.  (CCP § 403.040, subd. (a).) 

A party seeking to reclassify a case from unlimited to limited faces a high threshold.  (Ytuarte v. Superior Court (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 266, 278.)  The trial court must conclude that the verdict will “necessarily” fall short of the superior court jurisdictional requirement of a claim exceeding $25,000.  (Walker v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 257, 270.  The unlikeliness of a judgment in excess of $25,000 is not the test.  (Maldonado v. Superior Court (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 397, 402.)  The trial court reviews the record to determine whether the result is obtainable.  (Id.)  Simply stated, the trial court looks to the possibility of a jurisdictionally appropriate verdict, not to its probability.  (Id.)  Thus, the court evaluates the amount fairly in controversy; it does not adjudicate the merits of the claim.  (Chahal v. Superior Court (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 399, 402.)

Limited civil cases include ones in which the demand, exclusive of interest, or the value of the property in controversy amounts to twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) or less.  (Hiona v. Superior Court of City and County of San Francisco (2020) 48 Cal.App.5th 866, 871; CCP § 86, subd. (a)(1).)

Moving Defendant argues that Plaintiff’s maximum recovery necessarily falls short of $25,000 because her property damages, as evidenced by her current discovery responses, are under $25,000 and because emotional distress damages are not recoverable in a products liability action.

The Court finds that Moving Defendant has not demonstrated that Plaintiff’s recovery will necessarily fall below the $25,000 jurisdictional threshold for unlimited civil actions.  The evidence of Plaintiff’s property damages is incomplete, and it is not absolutely foreclosed that recovery will exceed $25,000.  (See Declaration of Carolyn M. Lawson ¶ 5, B-E.)[2]  The Court therefore DENIES the Motion.

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling. 

In consideration of the current COVID-19 pandemic situation, the Court¿strongly¿encourages that appearances on all proceedings, including this one, be made by LACourtConnect if the parties do not submit on the tentative.¿¿If you instead intend to make an appearance in person at Court on this matter, you must send an email by 2 p.m. on the last Court day before the scheduled date of the hearing to¿SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org¿stating your intention to appear in person.¿ The Court will then inform you by close of business that day of the time your hearing will be held. The time set for the hearing may be at any time during that scheduled hearing day, or it may be necessary to schedule the hearing for another date if the Court is unable to accommodate all personal appearances set on that date.¿ This rule is necessary to ensure that adequate precautions can be taken for proper social distancing.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar. 

  Dated this 23rd day of February 2023