TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiffs Katherine Roshodesh and Solomon Roshodesh’s Motion to Consolidate Related Cases or, in the Alternative, for Stay of Unlawful Detainer Action is DENIED.

Plaintiffs Katherine Roshodesh and Solomon Roshodesh to give notice. 

REASONING

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.)

Plaintiffs Katherine Roshodesh and Solomon Roshodesh (“Plaintiffs”) move the Court for an order consolidating the present action with Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23SMCV02911 (Goldstar Investments, LLC v. Roshodesh). The cases have been deemed related and are currently pending in the same department. Plaintiffs argue that both actions contain common issues of law and fact, having arisen out of the same claim for rent and money owed, and consolidation will avoid unnecessary costs, delay, and inconsistent rulings.

In this action, Plaintiffs allege that they have been residents at 811 North Hillcrest Road in Beverly Hills since September 1, 2018, and Defendants have failed to make necessary repairs, engaged in conduct designed to influence Plaintiffs to vacate, invaded Plaintiffs’ privacy, committed a nuisance, and engaged in unfair business practices. Plaintiffs have not provided a copy of the complaint in Case No. 23SMCV02911, but the Court takes judicial notice of the complaint in that case on its own motion pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d). In that action, an unlawful detainer action, Defendant Goldstar Investments LLC alleges that it owns the premises at 811 North Hillcrest Road, Plaintiffs entered into a written 30-month lease with monthly rent at $13,000, which became at least $15,500, Plaintiff failed to comply with the 3-Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit, which expired on June 14, 2023, and Defendant seeks past-due rent of $46,500, holdover damages of $516.66 per day, and forfeiture of the agreement. 

The Court finds that consolidation is not proper here. While the two cases concern the same property, 811 North Hillcrest Road, the issues of law and fact are not the same, as the present case is one relating to habitability of the property, while Case No. 23SMCV02911 is an unlawful detainer action seeking payment of rent owed, and the present case has additional parties named as defendants. Further, there is no basis to stay the unlawful detainer action, as Plaintiffs request, as Defendant was not required to wait for resolution of this action to seek payment of rent it believes it is lawfully owed, and Plaintiffs are not precluded from asserting the same arguments in the unlawful detainer action as they raise in the present action. Accordingly, Plaintiffs Katherine Roshodesh and Solomon Roshodesh’s Motion to Consolidate Related Cases or, in the Alternative, for Stay of Unlawful Detainer Action is DENIED.