Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 22STCV09902, Date: 2023-03-20 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV09902 Hearing Date: March 20, 2023 Dept: 27
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL
DISTRICT
|
Plaintiff, vs.
GREGORY
DICOSTANZA, et al.
Defendants. |
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) |
[TENTATIVE]
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF-IN-INTERVENTION INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST’S MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO FILE COMPLAINT-IN-INTERVENTION
Dept.
27 1:30
p.m. March
20, 2023 |
I. BACKGROUND
On
March 22, 2022, plaintiff Daniel Bolderoff (“Plaintiff”) brought this action
against defendant Gregory Dicostanza (“Defendant”) and Does 1 to 10, arising
out of a January 24, 202 motor vehicle collision. On August 4, 2022, Plaintiff named LA
Excavating, Inc. as Doe 1.
Insurance
Company of the West (“ICW”) now brings this motion for leave to file a
complaint-in-intervention.
No
opposition has been filed.
II. LEGAL STANDARD
“A
nonparty shall petition the court for leave to intervene by noticed motion or
ex parte application. The petition shall
include a copy of the proposed complaint in intervention or answer in
intervention and set forth the grounds upon which intervention rests.” (Code
Civ. Proc. § 387(c).)
“The
court shall, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the
action or proceeding if either of the following conditions is satisfied:
(A) A
provision of law confers an unconditional right to intervene.
(B) The
person seeking intervention claims an interest relating to the property or
transaction that is the subject of the action and that person is so situated
that the disposition of the action may impair or impede that person’s ability
to protect that interest, unless that person’s interest is adequately
represented by one or more of the existing parties.” (Code Civ. Proc. §
387(d)(1).)
Where
an employee brings an action for damages proximately caused by a third person,
an employer who pays or becomes obligated to pay compensation, or salary in
lieu of compensation, may likewise make a claim or bring an action against the
third person. (Lab. Code, § 3852.) “[T]he employer may recover in the same suit,
in addition to the total amount of compensation, damages for which he or she
was liable including all salary, wage, pension, or other emolument paid to the
employee or to his or her dependents.” (Ibid.)
“A
workers’ compensation carrier is authorized to attempt recovery of benefits
paid either through the maintenance of an independent action (Lab. Code, §
3852), intervention in the employee’s action (Lab. Code, § 3853), or assertion
of lien rights in the employee’s recovery (Lab. Code, § 3856, subd. (b).)” (Catello v. I.T.T. General Controls
(1984) 152 Cal.App.3d 1009, 1015, fn. 7.)
If
leave to intervene is granted by the court, the intervenor shall separately
file the complaint in intervention and serve notice of the court’s decision” to
parties who have appeared. (Code Civ. Proc. § 387(e).)
III. DISCUSSION
ICW seeks leave to file a
complaint-in-intervention on grounds that Pacific Coast Fleet Services, Inc., as
Plaintiff’s employer, has a legal right to intervene and ICW is subrogated to
the rights of Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s employer.
In
support, ICW offers a declaration from counsel who states that ICW is the
workers’ compensation carrier that insures Plaintiff’s employer, Pacific Coast
Fleet Services, Inc. ICW has paid
workers’ compensation benefits to Plaintiff pursuant to the workers’
compensation laws of the state of California. Counsel further states that this subrogation
lien is not final as the underlying workers’ compensation case is still open. (Fitzpatrick Decl., ¶¶ 6-7.) For this reason, ICW seeks leave to file a
complaint-in-intervention in this matter.
IV. CONCLUSION
Accordingly,
the motion is GRANTED.
Moving party to give notice.
Parties who intend to submit on this
tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating
intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided
on the court website at www.lacourt.org.
Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to
appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the
hearing and argue the matter. Unless you
receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume
that others might appear at the hearing to argue. If the Court does not receive emails from the
parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no
appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the
tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.
Dated this 20th day
of March 2023
|
|
|
|
|
Hon. Kerry Bensinger Judge of the Superior Court
|