Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 23STCV20888, Date: 2024-01-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV20888    Hearing Date: January 3, 2024    Dept: 27

 

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

EDGARDO UBALDO DIMAGGIO OCAMPO,

                   Plaintiff,

          vs.

 

METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, and DOES 1 through 25,

 

                   Defendant(s),

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO.: 23STCV20888

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEFENDANT COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES’S DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

 

Dept. 27

1:30 p.m.

January 03, 2024

 

I.       INTRODUCTION

          On August 31, 2023, Plaintiff Edgardo Ubaldo DiMaggio Ocampo (“Plaintiff”) filed his complaint against Defendants Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“MTA”), County of Los Angeles (“County”), and 25 unnamed individuals (Does 1 through 25), for Motor Vehicle Liability and General Negligence. The complaint alleges that on January 31, 2023, a bus operated by MTA collided with Plaintiff’s parked car while he was sitting inside, resulting in Plaintiff’s personal injuries and property damages.

Before filing of the complaint, Plaintiff had submitted administrative claims to both MTA and County. On April 17, 2023, County denied Plaintiff’s claim in its entirety, stating that the “incident involved a vehicle owned, maintained and/or controlled by an entity other than County.”

On November 21, 2023, a County’s legal representative contacted Plaintiff, requesting that County be dismissed from Plaintiff’s complaint. (Chong Decl. ¶ 3.)

On December 4, 2023, County, as a defendant, filed the instant demurrer in response to the complaint.

On December 18, 2023, Plaintiff filed Request for Dismissal, officially removing County as a defendant in the case.

 

II.      LEGAL STANDARDS

Code of Civil Procedure section 430.10 subdivision (a) provides, “[t]he party against whom a complaint or cross-complaint has been filed may object, by demurrer or answer as provided in Section 430.30, to the pleading on any one or more of the following grounds …” (Underlines added.)

 

III.     DISCUSSION

          County based its filling of demurrer on the authority under Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 430.10. According to subdivision (a) of the CCP section 430.10, only a party involved in the action is eligible to move for a demurrer. However, as of December 18, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Request for Dismissal, effectively removing County as a defendant in the case. Consequently, County ceased to be a party to the action. Therefore, the authority County cited under CCP section 430.10 is no longer applicable. In light of this development, the Court deems County’s Demurrer to be moot.   

           

IV.     CONCLUSION

The Court DENIES County’s Demurrer to Plaintiff’s Complaint on the grounds of mootness and the absence of legal authority by County.

County 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 3rd Day of January 2024

 

 

 

 

Hon. Lee S. Arian

Judge of the Superior Court