Judge: Jill Feeney, Case: 21STCV39395, Date: 2023-02-10 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV39395 Hearing Date: February 10, 2023 Dept: 30
Department 30, Spring Street Courthouse
February 10, 2023
21STCV39395
Related Case: 21STCV41322
Motion to Consolidate filed by Plaintiffs Jonathan and Ruth Ventura
DECISION
The motion is continued.
The parties are ordered to appear at the hearing to set a continued hearing date.
Moving party to provide notice.
Background
This is an action for negligence arising from a vehicle collision which took place in November 2019. Plaintiffs Jonathan and Ruth Ventura filed their Complaint against Defendants Enrique Gutierrez and Lyft, Inc. on October 26, 2021.
On January 31, 2023, the Court deemed this case related to 21STCV41322.
Defendant filed the instant motion to consolidate on December 15, 2022.
Summary
Moving Arguments
Plaintiffs move to consolidate this case with Adalberto Ramirez v. Lyft, Inc., et al. 21STCV41322 on the grounds that both cases involve common questions of law or fact, are pending in the same court, are related, and involve the same vehicle collision.
Opposing Arguments
None.
Legal Standard
California Code of Civil Procedure section 1048 states: “When actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the actions consolidated and it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.”
Under California Rules of Court, rule 3.350, subdivision (a)(1), a notice of motion to consolidate must: (A) List all named parties in each case, the names of those who have appeared, and the names of their respective attorneys of record; (B) Contain the captions of all the cases sought to be consolidated, with the lowest numbered case shown first; and (C) Be filed in each case sought to be consolidated. (2) The motion to consolidate: (A) Is deemed a single motion for the purpose of determining the appropriate filing fee, but memorandums, declarations, and other supporting papers must be filed only in the lowest numbered case; (B) Must be served on all attorneys of record and all non-represented parties in all of the cases sought to be consolidated; and (C) Must have a proof of service filed as part of the motion.
Discussion
Plaintiffs seek to consolidate the instant case with related case 21STCV41322. The two cases arise from the same vehicle collision and involve common questions of law or fact.
A procedural requirement of a motion to consolidate is that the notice of motion must be filed in each case sought to be consolidated. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.350(a)(1)(C). The Court notes that the instant notice of motion to consolidate was not filed in 21STCV41322. This is in violation of the California Rules of Court, rule 3.350(a)(1)(C).
Accordingly, the motion is continued until Plaintiffs file a notice of motion to consolidate in 21STCV41322.
