Judge: Joel L. Lofton, Case: 23GDCV00151, Date: 2024-04-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23GDCV00151    Hearing Date: April 11, 2024    Dept: X

   Tentative Ruling

Judge Joel L. Lofton, Department X

HEARING DATE:     April 11, 2024                                     TRIAL DATE: No date set.

CASE:                         SEPANA OGANESYAN, v. TRADER JOE’S COMPANY and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive.

CASE NO.:                 23GDCV00151

MOTION TO RECLASSIFY

MOVING PARTY:               Defendant Trader Joe’s Company

RESPONDING PARTY:      No response filed.

SERVICE:                              Filed March 12, 2024

RELIEF REQUESTED

             Defendant moves for an order reclassifying this case as an action of limited jurisdiction.

BACKGROUND

             This case arises out of Plaintiff’s claim she slipped and fell at Trader Joe’s store located at 103 E. Glenoaks Boulevard, Glendale, California, 91207. Plaintiff filed this complaint on January 24, 2023.

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant’s motion for an order reclassifying the present action as a limited jurisdiction case is GRANTED.

DISCUSSION

             Defendant moves for an order reclassifying this case as an action of limited jurisdiction.  

“If a party files a motion for reclassification after the time for that party to amend that party's initial pleading or to respond to a complaint, cross-complaint, or other initial pleading, the court shall grant the motion and enter an order for reclassification only if both of the following conditions are satisfied: [¶] (1) The case is incorrectly classified. [¶] (2) The moving party shows good cause for not seeking reclassification earlier.” (Code of Civ. Proc. § 403.040.)

            Defendant provides that Plaintiff has billed $9,815.00 in medical care expenses. (Free Decl. ¶ 4.) Defendant provides that Plaintiff stated during her deposition that she has not sought medical for her injuries since 2021 and has no future appointments scheduled. (Id. ¶ 5.) Defendant also provides that Plaintiff stated she is not seeking recovery for loss of earnings, future earnings, or property damage. (Id. ¶ 6.)

            The statutory definition of a limited civil case includes “[a] case at law 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.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 86.)

            Here, Defendant has demonstrated that Plaintiff’s current damages are below the $25,000 threshold and that Plaintiff likely does not have any additional damages. Defendant had demonstrated that the amount in controversy is less than $25,000. Further, Defendant provides that the motion was not made earlier because discovery was still ongoing and because Defendant had tried to initiate settlement discussion. (Free Decl. ¶ 7.) Defendant has shown good cause for not seeking reclassification earlier. Plaintiff has not opposed the present motion.

CONCLUSION

Defendant’s motion for an order reclassifying the present action as a limited jurisdiction case is GRANTED.

Dated:   April 11, 2024                                               ___________________________________

                                                                                    Joel L. Lofton

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court