TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC and Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee of Upland Mortgage Loan Trust A’s Motion to Consolidate Cases 22SMCV01175 and 23SMCV03392 and Vacate Dates is DENIED.

Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC and Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee of Upland Mortgage Loan Trust A to give notice. 

REASONING

Request for Judicial Notice

Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC and Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee of Upland Mortgage Loan Trust A (“Plaintiffs”) request judicial notice of the First Amended Complaint in Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23SMCV03392. Plaintiffs’ request is GRANTED pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d).

Nonparty California FAIR Plan Association (“the FAIR Plan”), a defendant in Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23SMCV03392, requests judicial notice of the First Amended Complaint in Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23SMCV03392, the complaint in the present action, and the Court’s minute order dated November 16, 2023, in this action. The FAIR Plan’s request is GRANTED pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d). The FAIR Plan also requests judicial notice of a copy of Policy No. CFP 2697143 00 issued by the FAIR Plan. The FAIR Plan’s request is DENIED, as there is no basis to take judicial notice of this document.

Plaintiffs also request judicial notice of the demurrer to the First Amended Complaint filed by the FAIR Plan in Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23SMCV03392. Plaintiffs’ request is GRANTED pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d).

Analysis

The trial court has discretion to consolidate actions involving common questions of law or fact. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a).) The purpose of consolidation is “to promote trial convenience and economy by avoiding duplication of procedure, particularly in the proof of issues common to both actions.” (Estate of Baker (1982) 131 Cal.App.3d 471, 485.)

In deciding whether to consolidate actions, the Court generally considers the following factors: (1) timeliness of the motion, i.e., whether granting consolidation would delay the trial of any of the cases involved; (2) complexity, i.e., whether joining the actions involved would make the trial too confusing or complex for a jury; and (3) prejudice, i.e., whether consolidation would adversely affect the rights of any party. (See State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1956) 47 Cal.2d 428, 430-431; Todd-Stenberg v. Dalkon Shield Claimants Trust (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 976, 978-979.)

Here, Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC and Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee of Upland Mortgage Loan Trust A (“Plaintiffs”) move to consolidate this case with Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23SMCV03392 (Hughes v. California FAIR Plan Association) on the grounds the two cases involve common issues of fact, law, and common witnesses, and consolidation would save judicial resources by avoiding two separate cases adjudicated and would avoid potentially inconsistent results.

Notably, this motion was filed on November 13, 2023, and on November 16, 2023, this Court issued a minute order deeming that the cases were not related within the meaning of California Rules of Court, rule 3.300(a). Further, Case No. 23SMCV03392 is pending in Department 207, while the present action is in Department N. Los Angeles Superior Court, Local Rules, rule 3.3(g) provides that “[c]ases may not be consolidated unless they are in the same department,” and “[a] motion to consolidate two or more cases may be noticed and heard after the cases, initially filed in different departments, have been related into a single department, or if the cases were already assigned to that department.” Los Angeles Superior Court, Local Rules, rule 3.3(g) makes clear that “[c]ases may not be consolidated unless they are in the same department.” Plaintiffs argue only that the Court’s order deeming the cases not related “appears to have been in error” (Reply, p. 8, l. 5), but this is not the proper procedure for the Court to reconsider its order or for Plaintiffs to seek relation of the actions. Accordingly, Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC and Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee of Upland Mortgage Loan Trust A’s Motion to Consolidate Cases 22SMCV01175 and 23SMCV03392 and Vacate Dates is DENIED.