Judge: Layne H. Melzer, Case: 2020-01153656, Date: 2022-10-20 Tentative Ruling

DEF/X-Complainant Geotechnical Solutions, Inc.

1. Motion - Other (Motion to Deem Case Complex)

X-DEF/ X-Complainant Cousyn Grading & Demo, Inc.

2. Joinder

DEF/X-Complainant Jay Sehgal; DEF/X-Complainant Rita Sehgal

3. Joinder

DEF/X-Complainant Aquarius Investments, Inc.

4. Joinder

Defendant/Cross-Complainant Geotechnical Solutions, Inc.’s motion to deem this matter complex is granted.

The joinders filed by Defendants/Cross-Complainants Cousyn Grading & Demo, Inc., Jay Sehgal and Rita Sehgal, Aquarius Investments, Inc., Krizia Corporation and Dagoberto Leyva are also granted.

A ‘complex case’ is an action that requires exceptional judicial management to avoid placing unnecessary burdens on the court or the litigants and to expedite the case, keep costs reasonable, and promote effective decision making by the court, the parties, and counsel.” (CRC, Rule 3.400(a).) An action is provisionally a complex case if it involves certain claims, including construction defect claims.

This matter is a construction defect case involving currently 15 Defendants/Cross-Defendants.  There already is a Case Management Order in place due to the large amount of discovery and dispositive motions that are needed. (Davidson Decl., ¶¶ 3-5, Exs. 1, 2) It is expected that this matter will involve no less than 40 experts, 17 non-expert witnesses, thousands of exhibits, and will take a minimum of 30 days for trial. (Davidson Decl., ¶ 9.)  In addition, there is expected to be a significant number of MSJs, a motion for bifurcation of issues and claims, an Evid. Code § 730 expert (due to the scientific data and claims involving soils issues and pool constructability), and 15 separately represented parties filing a number of motions in limine. (Davidson Decl., ¶¶ 9, 12) 

It appears that recently, Plaintiffs have noticed over 50 percipient witness depositions.  There are an additional 25 percipient witness depositions that the defendants would like to take, as well as approximately 20 expert depositions based on the current designations of the parties in the case. (Davidson Decl., ¶ 16, Exs. 4, 7.) 

Based on the foregoing, the Court agrees that this matter should be designated as Complex, as it “requires exceptional judicial management to avoid placing unnecessary burdens on the court or the litigants,” pursuant to CRC, Rule 3.400.