Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 22NWCV01049, Date: 2023-07-11 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22NWCV01049 Hearing Date: July 11, 2023 Dept: C
TAHIR v. H.P. Palomino, Inc., et al.
CASE
NO.: 22NWCV01049
HEARING:
7/11/23
TENTATIVE RULING
Defendants Shah,
Hassan, and H.P. Palomino, Inc.’s motion to consolidate is GRANTED. Case
No. 22NWCV01049 is deemed the lead case.
Moving Parties to give NOTICE.
Defendants
Shah, Hassan and H.P. Palomino, Inc. (“Palomino”) moves to consolidate Case
Nos. 22NWCV01049 and 23NWCV00066.
When actions involving a common question of
law or fact are pending before the court, it may order a joint hearing or trial
of any or all the matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the actions
consolidated and it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may
tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay. (CCP § 1048.)
In Case No. 22NWCV01049, Plaintiff
Abu Tahir’s Complaint alleges that Defendants Shah, Hassan, and Palomino owe
Plaintiff a deferred salary in the sum of $155,250.00. (Complaint, ¶ 14.) Based thereon, the Complaint asserts causes
of action for:
1. Open
Book Account
2. Account
Stated
In Case No. 23NWCV00066, the operative First Amended
Complaint (“FAC”) alleges that on or about October 23, 2012, “Plaintiff [Abu
Tahir] and Shah along with Nasrin Hassan and Riaz Shah entered into a
Shareholder’s Agreement setting forth the management, responsibility and accountability
of Palomino. Under the terms of the
Shareholder’s Agreement, Plaintiff funded the amount of $83,200.00 to build a
kitchen. It was agreed that said amount…
would be treated as a loan to Palomino and would be payable by Palomino with
ten percent accumulative interest added to the cost starting January 1, 2013
until fully paid.” (FAC, ¶ 12.) “On or about June 12, 2019, Plaintiff and
Shah on behalf of Palomino and its CEO, Hassan… entered into a written
agreement wherein Shah and Palomino agreed to return and/or repay Plaintiff’s
contributions he incurred and/or contributed towards the remodeling and
operational expense of Palomino.” (Id.,
¶15.) “However, despite Plaintiff’s
numerous demands… Defendants refused… to comply with Plaintiff’s demand.” (Id., ¶ 16.)
Based thereon, the Complaint asserts
causes of action for:
1. Open
Book Account
2. Account
Stated
The court finds that Case Nos. 22NWCV01049
and 23NWCV00066 involve common
questions of law or fact. Both actions
arise from the parties’ interactions with one another concerning a joint
venture that spanned the same time-period from July 19, 2012 (22NWCV01049
Complaint, ¶ 11 cf. 22NWCV00066 FAC, ¶11) – June 20, 2019 (22NWCV01049
Complaint, ¶ 14 cf. 22NWCV00066 FAC, ¶15.)
Because the actions will require overlapping discovery and witnesses,
consolidation will promote judicial economy.
Motion is GRANTED. Case No. 22NWCV01049 is
deemed the lead case.