Judge: John J. Kralik, Case: 23BBCV01073, Date: 2025-03-14 Tentative Ruling
Counsel who wish to submit on the tentative ruling may do so by emailing BURDeptB@lacourt.org
PLEASE WRITE THE CASE NUMBER AND PARTY YOU REPRESENT. YOU MAY ONLY SUBMIT ON BEHALF OF THE PARTY YOU REPRESENT. YOU MAY NOT SUBMIT ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER PARTY. Counsel are directed to cc all other counsel if you are submitting on the tentative ruling.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR NEED CLARIFICATION ON THE TENTATIVE, YOU MUST APPEAR AND ADDRESS YOUR QUESTIONS TO THE COURT.
IF BOTH SIDES SUBMIT ON THE TENTATIVE RULING, THE TENTATIVE RULING THEN BECOMES THE ORDER OF THE COURT ON THE MOTION DATE AND NO APPEARANCES ARE NECESSARY.
THERE WILL BE NO RESPONSES TO ANY INQUIRIES SUBMITTED THROUGH THIS SITE.
Warning regarding electronic appearances: All software for remote or electronic appearances is subject to malfunction based on system weakness and human error, which can originate from any of the multiple parties participating each morning. The seamless operation of the Court’s electronic appearance software is dependent on numerous inconstant and fluctuating factors that may impact whether you, or other counsel or the Court itself can be heard in a particular case. Not all these factors are within the control of the courtroom staff. For example, at times, the system traps participants in electronic purgatories where they cannot be heard and where the courtroom staff is not aware of their presence. If you call the courtroom, please be respectful of the fact that a court hearing is going on, and that the courtroom staff is doing their best to use an imperfect system. If it is truly important to you to be heard, please show up to the courtroom in the normal way. Parking is free or reasonable in Burbank.
THANK YOU!
Case Number: 23BBCV01073 Hearing Date: March 14, 2025 Dept: NCB
North
Central District
|
nina
beltran, Plaintiff, v. your
way tree service, inc., et al., Defendants. |
Case No.: 23BBCV01073 Hearing Date: March 14, 2025 [TENTATIVE] order RE: Motion for an order to bifurcate trial |
Background
A.
Allegations
Plaintiff Nina Beltran (“Plaintiff”)
alleges that she was employed by Defendants Your Way Tree Service, Inc.
(“YWTS”) and Jesse Montoya (“Montoya”).
She alleges that on January 24, 2023, she requested, for the first time
in her three years of employment, to take a day off from work with Defendants
to take care of a personal/family matter.
She alleges that in response to her request, Defendants told her to take
the whole week off. Plaintiff alleges
that she responded that she did not need the entire week off and that she asked
if she should return to work on Saturday, but Defendants did not respond. Plaintiff allege that at an in-person meeting
on January 29, 2023, she was informed that she was terminated from
employment. Plaintiff has filed this
lawsuit, alleging that she was wrongfully terminated for requesting a day off
from work and for resisting to partake in Montoya’s harassing conduct and advances. She alleges various Labor Code and IWC Wage
Order violations.
The complaint, filed May 15, 2023, alleges
causes of action for: (1) failure to pay timely wages; (2) failure to pay
compensation due upon termination; (3) failure to pay all wages for overtime;
(4) failure to provide accurate wage statements; (5) failure to provide rest
breaks; (6) failure to provide meal breaks; (7) hostile work environment –
sexual harassment; (8) failure to prevent harassment; (9) retaliation; (10)
wrongful termination; (11) IIED; and (12) unfair competition.
On July 1, 2024, Plaintiff dismissed
without prejudice the 9th and 10th causes of action only.
B.
Motion on Calendar
On January 8, 2025, Defendants filed a
motion for an order to bifurcate trial.
The Court is not in receipt of an
opposition brief.
LEGAL
STANDARD
CCP
§ 598 states in relevant part:
The court may, when the convenience of witnesses, the
ends of justice, or the economy and efficiency of handling the litigation
would be promoted thereby, on motion of a party, after notice and hearing, make an order,
no later than the close of pretrial conference in cases in which such pretrial
conference is to be held, or, in other cases, no later than 30 days before the trial date,
that the trial of any
issue or any part thereof shall precede the trial of any other issue or any
part thereof in the case, except for special defenses which may be tried
first pursuant to Sections 597 and 597.5. The court, on its own motion, may make such an
order at any time. Where trial of the issue of liability as to all
causes of action precedes the trial of other issues or parts thereof, and the
decision of the court, or the verdict of the jury upon such issue so tried is
in favor of any party on whom liability is sought to be imposed, judgment in
favor of such party shall thereupon be entered and no trial of other issues in
the action as against such party shall be had unless such judgment shall be
reversed upon appeal or otherwise set aside or vacated.
(CCP
§ 598.)
CCP § 1048(b)
states in relevant part:
The
court, in furtherance of convenience or to avoid prejudice, or when separate
trials will be conducive to expedition and economy, may order a separate trial
of any cause of action, including a cause of action asserted in a
cross-complaint, or of any separate issue or of any number of causes of action
or issues, preserving the right of trial by jury required by the Constitution
or a statute of the state or of the United States.
(CCP § 1048(b).)
Civil
Code, § 3295(d) states:
The court shall, on application of any defendant,
preclude the admission of evidence of that defendant's profits or financial
condition until after the trier of fact returns a verdict for plaintiff
awarding actual damages and finds that a defendant is guilty of malice,
oppression, or fraud in accordance with Section 3294. Evidence of profit and
financial condition shall be admissible only as to the defendant or defendants
found to be liable to the plaintiff and to be guilty of malice, oppression, or
fraud. Evidence of profit and financial condition shall be presented to the
same trier of fact that found for the plaintiff and found one or more
defendants guilty of malice, oppression, or fraud.
(Civ. Code, § 3295(d).)
DISCUSSION
A.
Trial Date
On February 3, 2025, the Court granted
Defendants’ ex parte application to continue the trial date. The Final Status Conference is set for May
29, 2025. The Jury Trial is set for June
9, 2025. The discovery cut-off deadlines
are tied with this trial date.
B.
Discussion of Motion
Defendants move to bifurcate the issues of
liability, actual damages, and fraud, malice, or oppression before the issue of
punitive damages. Defendants argue that
Plaintiff seeks punitive damages in connection with her 7th and 8th
causes of action for hostile work environment and failure to prevent
harassment.
Defendants argue that bifurcation will
benefit the Court, the parties, and their counsel so that court time is not
wasted on Defendants’ financial condition to support an award of punitive
damages, before liability and evidence of fraud, malice, and/or oppression are
first established. They also argue that
evidence of their financial condition may prejudice the jury’s determination of
liability.
The Court finds that phasing the
trial so that issues of liability and actual damages are determined first,
prior to the presentation of evidence to support punitive damages would promote
judicial economy and efficiency. Unless
liability and actual damages are first determined, the issue of punitive
damages cannot be reached. As such, the
motion to bifurcate is granted.
CONCLUSION AND
ORDER
Defendants Your Way Tree Service, Inc. and
Jesse Montoya’s motion to bifurcate is granted.
The trial shall be phased as follows: (1) issues of liability, actual
damages, and fraud, malice, or oppression; and (2) the issue of punitive
damages and Defendants’ financials.
Defendants shall provide notice of this
order.
DATED: March 14, 2025 ___________________________
John
Kralik
Judge
of the Superior Court