TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Antonio Alcazar Barragan’s Motion to Consolidate Related Actions is GRANTED in part.

The present action, Case No. 23SMCV02234 (Dylan Jahanbigloo v. Antonio Alcazar Barragan), is consolidated with Case No. 23SMCV02935 (Wayne Hinkelman v. Lyft) and Case No. 23STCV15212 (Jack Oscar Zide v. Lyft Inc.), for pretrial purposes only, with the present action, Case No. 23SMCV02234 (Dylan Jahanbigloo v. Antonio Alcazar Barragan), serving as the lead case. All future filings shall be made in Case No. 23SMCV02234 (Dylan Jahanbigloo v. Antonio Alcazar Barragan).

Defendant Antonio Alcazar Barragan 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.)

Defendant Antonio Alcazar Barragan (“Defendant”) moves the Court for an order consolidating the present action with Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23SMCV02935 (Wayne Hinkelman v. Lyft) and Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23STCV15212 (Jack Oscar Zide v. Lyft Inc.). The cases have been deemed related, and all three cases are currently pending in this department. Defendant argues that the cases share common issues of law and fact, as they arise out of the same incident on July 1, 2021, consolidation will promote efficiency, and consolidation will save time and costs and avoid unnecessary duplication of efforts. No opposition has been filed.

In this action, Plaintiff Dylan Jahanbigloo alleges harm arising out of a collision on July 1, 2021 at the intersection of West Olympic Boulevard and Le Doux Road when Plaintiff was a passenger in Defendant Jack Zide’s vehicle, and Defendant Antonio Alcazar Barragan collided into the vehicle. In Case No. 23SMCV02935, Plaintiff Wayne Hinkelman alleges harm arising out of a collision on July 1, 2021 at the intersection of Olympic Boulevard and Corning Street involving Defendants Lyft, Inc., Warren Zide, and Antonio Alcazar Barragan. In Case No. 23STCV15212, Plaintiff Jack Oscar Zide alleges harm arising out of a collision on July 1, 2021 at Normandie Avenue and Olympic Boulevard involving Defendants Lyft Inc. and Antonio Alcaza.

While the allegations differ slightly in each complaint, it appears that all three actions concern the same motor vehicle accident. The Court finds that consolidation of this case with Case Nos. 23SMCV02935 and 23STCV15212 is proper, but only for pretrial purposes. The actions will involve common questions of law or fact, as the claims arise out of the same incident, many of the same witnesses will likely testify in each action, and discovery will likely overlap in the three actions. The motion was timely brought, and the claims in the actions are relatively simple, such that the Court has no reason to conclude at this juncture that consolidation would make the trial too confusing or complex. Further, there is no obvious prejudice to any party, and consolidation will promote convenience and economy by avoiding duplication of motions and hearings. However, the Court lacks a basis to conclude that consolidation of the actions for trial is necessary at this juncture. Defendant or any other party may renew this request at a date closer to trial of the actions.

Accordingly, Defendant Antonio Alcazar Barragan’s Motion to Consolidate Related Actions is GRANTED in part. The present action, Case No. 23SMCV02234 (Dylan Jahanbigloo v. Antonio Alcazar Barragan), is consolidated with Case No. 23SMCV02935 (Wayne Hinkelman v. Lyft) and Case No. 23STCV15212 (Jack Oscar Zide v. Lyft Inc.), for pretrial purposes only, with the present action, Case No. 23SMCV02234 (Dylan Jahanbigloo v. Antonio Alcazar Barragan), serving as the lead case. All future filings shall be made in Case No. 23SMCV02234 (Dylan Jahanbigloo v. Antonio Alcazar Barragan).