Judge: John J. Kralik, Case: 22BBCV00634, Date: 2023-02-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22BBCV00634    Hearing Date: February 15, 2023    Dept: NCB

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

North Central District

Department B

BACKGROUND

A.    Allegations of Case No. 22BBCV00634

In Case No. 22BBCV00634, Plaintiff ATS Truck Stop, LLC (“ATS”) alleges that Aram and Arthur Semerdjian operated a business of leasing industrial properties from owners and, in turn, subleasing them to businesses and/or to 18-wheeler trucks.  (FAC, ¶1.)  ATS alleges that Defendant PNM Properties, LLC (“PNM”) leased 5 different properties to ATS at 9048 Bradley Avenue (occupied by Las Dunas Ready Mix), 9250 Tujunga Avenue (which Plaintiff operates), 11357 Pendleton Street (occupied by Athens Trash Services at 11311-A and Capital Ready Mix at 11311-B), 11365 and 11401 Pendleton Avenue (occupied by Singh Disposal and C&D Recycling), and 11311-B Pendleton Street (occupied by Capital Ready Mix) in Sun Valley.  (Id., ¶7.)  ATS alleges that PNM intentionally interfered with ATS’s sublease with Singh/C&D and Capital Ready Mix by collecting rents due to ATS in November 2022, claiming ATS was in default of the Master Lease.  (Id., ¶¶18-19.) 

The first amended complaint, filed November 15, 2022, alleges causes of action for: (1) declaratory relief; (2) specific performance of contract; (3) breach of contract; (4) intentional misrepresentation; (5) negligent misrepresentation; (6) Business & Professions Code, § 17200 et seq.; (7) intentional interference with contractual relations; (8) conversion; and (9) money had and received.

B.     Cross-Complaint

On February 1, 2023, Defendant/Cross-Complainant PNM filed a cross-complaint against Cross-Defendants Arthur Semerdjian (as an individual and dba Art’s Truck Stop), Super Natural, Inc., ATS Truck Stop, and Aram Semerdjian (aka Eric Semerdjian). The cross-complaint alleges causes of action for: (1) fraud; (2) breach of contract; (3) breach of guaranty; (4) ejectment; (5) conversion; and (6) violation of California Penal Code, § 496.

C.     Relevant Background

On November 23, 2022, the Court signed an order granting temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.  PNM was restrained and enjoined from: (1) interfering with ATS collecting rent from its subtenants at the real properties that ATS is leasing from PNM; (2) collecting rent from ATS’s subtenants at the real properties that ATS is leasing from PNM, and in turn subleasing to ATS’s subtenants.  The Court also ordered that pending further order, monies received to date shall be applied to rent currently due for December and November 2022. 

On December 16, 2022, the Court granted the preliminary injunction on the same terms and extended the TRO by 10 days.  The Court also raised bond to $75,000. 

D.    Motion on Calendar

On December 16, 2022, Plaintiff ATS Truck Stop, LLC (“ATS”) filed a motion to consolidate for all purposes LASC Case Nos. 22BBCV00634, 22BBCV01041, and 22BBCV01042.

On February 1, 2023, Defendant PNM filed an opposition brief.

On February 7, 2023, ATS filed a reply brief.

DISCUSSION

ATS moves to consolidate cases 22BBCV00634 (this action, filed on September 2, 2022), 22BBCV01041 (PNM Properties, LLC v. Semerdjian et al., filed on November 21, 2022), and 22BBCV01042 (PNM Properties, LLC v. Semerdjian et al., filed on November 21, 2022).  These three cases are currently assigned to Department B of the Burbank Courthouse. 

“Cases may not be consolidated unless they are in the same department. A motion to consolidate two or more cases may be noticed and heard after the cases, initially filed in different departments, have been related into a single department, or if the cases were already assigned to that department.” (Local Rule 3.3(g).)  The three cases have already been assigned to this department and are pending before this Court.  Notices of related cases were filed in these three cases, but the cases have not been ordered related by the Court.  The Court hereby relates the three cases.

CCP §1048(a) provides that the Court may order a joint trial on matters that “involv[e] a common question of law or fact.” 

·         The allegations of this instant action (22BBCV00634) are summarized above in the “Background” section.

·         In 22BBCV01041, PNM filed an unlawful detainer action against Arthur Semerdjian dba Art’s Truck Stop, Super Natural, Inc., ATS Truck Stop, LLC, Aram Semerdjian, and all parties in possession regarding the property located at 9250 Tujunga Avenue. 

·         In 22BBCV01042, PNM filed an unlawful detainer action against Arthur Semerdjian dba Art’s Truck Stop, Super Natural, Inc., ATS Truck Stop, LLC, Aram Semerdjian, and all parties in possession regarding the property located at 11311 Pendleton Street. 

ATS argues that the three cases arise from and relate to common questions of law and fact with respect to the right to possession of real properties, the same landlord and tenants, the same issue of “excess rent” alleged in all three cases, and whether PNM is estopped/waived the right to excess rent and the right to terminate the leases.  ATS argues that the witnesses in all 3 cases will be the same—ATS’s owner (Aram Semerdjian) and PNM’s officer/property manager (Cindi Galfin)—as well as the same documentary evidence in the form of leases, emails, and text messages. 

            Here, common questions of law and fact exist in the three cases.  This instant action involves five properties, which includes two of the properties at issue in the unlawful detainer actions.  It appears based on the allegations of the FAC in this case that each of the leases for all five properties were entered between ATS and PNM (or its predecessor Pick Your Park Auto Wrecking) at the same time, including subsequent lease extensions.  Upon review of the pleadings in these three cases, the legal questions and ultimate relief sought in these actions involve common questions of law and fact based on the lease agreements, entitlement to possession of the properties, and entitlement to rental payments from the properties.  Further, relating and consolidating these actions would promote judicial economy and be in the interests of justice. 

In opposition, PNM states that “in principle,” it does not oppose the consolidation motion as requested with respect to this case (22BBCV00634) and the 2 unlawful detainer cases (22BBCV01041 and 22BBCV01042).  (Opp. at p.2.)  However, PNM requests that the Court “permit PNM to collect rents pending trial without PNM’s acceptance of rent acceptance renewing any of the tenancies terminated by 30-day notices.”  (Id.)  PNM states that the Court granted ATS’s motion for preliminary injunction on December 16, 2022, enjoining PNM from collecting rent from ATS’s subtenants and stated that the temporary restraining order continued provided there was no default in the monthly rent going forward pending trial.  (Id. at p.3.)  PNM states that it has served 30-day notices to quit on 5 sections of the property leased to ATS and that these notices will expire on February 21, 2023.  PNM intends to file 5 additional unlawful detainer lawsuits.  (Id. at p.3.)  Thus, PNM seeks to protect its income while pursuing its right to terminate the month-to-month tenancies pending trial. 

In reply, ATS argues that PNM is seeking to collect $132,832.32 per month in lease payments for 5 properties, but PNM does not refuse the right to evict ATS and its subtenants.  ATS argues that consolidation should be ordered with no conditions and requirement that ATS waive any defenses. 

At this time, the Court is inclined to deny the imposition of conditions for consolidation as requested by PNM.  The Court already entered the TRO and preliminary injunction orders, restraining PNM from interfering with ATS’s collection of rent from subtenants and collecting rent from ATS’s subtenants.  The Court declines to reconsider this issue. The Court orders the parties to attend the hearing so that it may make inquiries about PNM’s “conditions.” 

The Court relates the three actions 22BBCV00634, 22BBCV01041, and 22BBCV01042.  These three cases have already been assigned to Department B of the Burbank Courthouse.  The motion to consolidate the three cases is conditionally granted.  Case 22BBCV00634 is the lead case and all future papers are to be filed under that case number.  The Court has been informed by the parties in these cases at hearings on separate matters that there may be additional related cases that will or have been filed.  The Court grants the motion to relate and consolidate three particular cases, but may reconsider its ruling upon the parties’ request to relate and/or consolidate any additional or newly-filed cases.  Further, the parties or this Court on its motion may bifurcate certain issues, particularly for jury and non-jury issues. 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff ATS Truck Stop, LLC’s motion to consolidate Case Nos. 22BBCV00634, 22BBCV01041, and 22BBCV01042 is granted.  This instant action (22BBCV00634) shall be deemed the lead case and all future papers are to be filed under that case number.  The Court orders the parties to attend the hearing so that the Court may make inquiries and seek clarification regarding Defendant PNM Properties, LLC’s request in the opposition brief.

The demurrers and motions to consolidate filed in Case Nos. 22BBCV01041 and 22BBCV01042 and set for this hearing date of February 15, 2023 shall be vacated and reset for hearing on February 15, 2023 under the lead case number. 

The current Final Status Conference and Jury Trial dates set for May 23, 2023 and June 5, 2023, respectively, in this action shall remain as the Final Status Conference and Trial dates for the consolidated matters.

Plaintiff ATS Truck Stop, LLC is ordered to give notice of this order.