Judge Holly J. Fujie, Case Number: 23STCV14422, Date: 2024-06-20 Tentative Ruling

MOVING PARTY: Defendants Cochran, Davis & Associates, PC, Jeffrey Thomas Bolson, and Joan E. Cochran

This action stems from a legal malpractice claim brought by Plaintiffs Saeed Farkhondehpour and Illusion Holdings, LLC against Defendants Cochran, Davis & Associates, PC, Jeffrey Thomas Bolson, and Joan E. Cochran (collectively “Cochran”) and Callanan, Rodgers & Dzida, LLP and Joseph S. Dzida (collectively “Callanan”). The legal malpractice claim relates to Cochran and Callanan’s joint representation of Plaintiffs as defendants in the matter of Ocean Blue Investments, LLC v. Saeed Farkhodehpour, et al., LASC Case No. BC709417 (the “Lawsuit”).

Cochran filed an answer to the complaint on September 9, 2023, without filing a cross-complaint against Callanan at that time. Cochran now seeks leave to file a cross-complaint against Callanan. The motion is unopposed.

A party against whom a cause of action has been asserted in a complaint or cross-complaint may file a cross-complaint setting forth either or both of the following:

(a) Any cause of action he has against any of the parties who filed the complaint or cross-complaint against him. Nothing in this subdivision authorizes the filing of a cross-complaint against the plaintiff in an action commenced under Title 7 (commencing with Section 1230.010) of Part 3.

(b) Any cause of action he has against a person alleged to be liable thereon, whether or not such person is already a party to the action, if the cause of action asserted in his cross-complaint (1) arises out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences as the cause brought against him or (2) asserts a claim, right, or interest in the property or controversy which is the subject of the cause brought against him.

After the trial date has been set, a party seeking to file a cross-complaint must obtain leave of court. (Code Civ. Proc., § 428.50(b).) Leave may be granted in the interest of justice at any time during the course of the action. (Id., § 428.50(c).) Indeed, where a cause of action would otherwise be lost, leave to file a cross-complaint is appropriate even if the party was negligent in not moving for leave to file earlier. “The legislative mandate is clear. A policy of liberal construction of section 426.50 to avoid forfeiture of causes of action is imposed on the trial court. A motion to file a cross-complaint at any time during the course of the action must be granted unless bad faith of the moving party is demonstrated where forfeiture would otherwise result.” (Silver Organizations, Ltd. v. Frank (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 94, 98-99.)

“Cross-complaints for comparative equitable indemnity would appear virtually always transactionally related to the main action.” (Time for Living, Inc. v. Guy Hatfield Homes (1991) 230 Cal.App.3d 30, 38.)

In its proposed cross-complaint against Callanan, Cochran argues that Callanan was somehow responsible for the events described in Plaintiffs’ complaint and is thus accountable for the damages incurred by Cochran. As a result, Cochran seeks to assert causes of action against Callanan for equitable indemnity and apportionment of fault, among others.

The Court finds that Cochran’s proposed cross-complaint against Callanan arises out of the same transaction and occurrence as the claim brought by Plaintiffs. Both claims relate to Cochran and Callanan’s joint representation of Plaintiffs in the Lawsuit, which is at issue in the main action.

As discussed above, the law mandates granting leave to file a compulsory cross-claim absent evidence of bad faith.

Accordingly, the Court will grant leave for Cochran to file the cross-complaint against Callanan in the interest of justice. The Cross-Complaint is ordered to be filed by Cochran within ten (10) Court days.

Defendants Cochran, Davis & Associates, PC, Jeffrey Thomas Bolson, and Joan E. Cochran are ordered to give notice of this ruling.

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.

Hon. Holly J. Fujie

Judge of the Superior Court