Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 21STCV13947, Date: 2023-09-08 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV13947 Hearing Date: December 22, 2023 Dept: 28
Having considered the moving, opposing, and reply papers, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On April 13, 2021, Plaintiff Patricia Avila (“Avila”) filed an action against Defendants Chris Brown (“Brown”) and Does 1-50 for premises liability, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and strict liability.
On October 25, 2021, Avila amended the complaint to include Defendant Black Pyramid, LLC (“Black Pyramid”) as Doe 1.
On February 16, 2022, Avila filed a first amended complaint against Brown, Black Pyramid, and Does 2-50 for premises liability, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and negligence.
On May 23, 2022, Brown and Black Pyramid filed an answer.
On December 8, 2023, Avila filed a second amended complaint against Brown, Black Pyramid, and Does 2-50 for premises liability, negligence—bystander emotional distress, and negligence.
Trial is currently set for July 15, 2024.
B. Case number 21STCV24811
On July 6, 2021, Plaintiffs Jane Doe (“Jane Doe”) and John Doe (“John Doe”) filed this action against Brown, Black Pyramid, Doe Homeowners, Doe Landlord, Doe Renter, Doe Dog Trainer, CB Breeder, and Does 1-100 for “strict liability under dog bite statute for violation of Civil Code 3342,” “strict liability for injury caused by domestic animal with dangerous propensities,” strict liability and negligence per se, premises liability/dangerous condition of property, negligence, landlord liability for dog bites, negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and loss of consortium.
On June 22, 2022, the clerk entered Brown’s default.
On August 25, 2022, Brown and Black Pyramid filed an answer.
On October 23, 2023, Brown and Black Pyramid filed a motion to consolidate. On December 11, 2023, Jane Doe filed an opposition. On December 15, 2023, Jane Doe filed a supplemental opposition.
On December 13, 2023, the Court granted in part Black Pyramid’s motion for judgment on the pleadings on Jane Doe’s claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress with 30 days leave to amend. In all other respects, the Court denied Black Pyramid's motion for judgment on the pleadings.
Trial is currently scheduled for January 23, 2024.
C. The Court relates the cases
On June 13, 2022, the Court found that case numbers 21STCV13947 and 21STCV24811 are related within the meaning of California Rules of Court, rule 3.300(a). Case number 21STCV13947 became the lead case. The cases were assigned to Department 28 at Spring Street Courthouse for all purposes.
D. Defendants move the consolidate the cases
1. Case number 21STCV13947
On October 19, 2023, in case number 21STCV13947, Brown and Black Pyramid filed a motion to consolidate case numbers 21STCV13947 and 21STCV24811, to be heard December 22, 2023. On December 11, 2023, Avila filed an opposition. On December 15, 2023, Brown and Black Pyramid filed a reply. On December 18, 2023, Avila filed objections to the supplemental declaration supporting the reply. On December 19, 2023, Brown and Black Pyramid filed objections to Avila’s sur-reply.
2. Case number 21STCV24811
On October 23, 2023, in case number 21STCV24811, Brown and Black Pyramid filed a motion to consolidate case numbers 21STCV13947 and 21STCV24811, to be heard December 22, 2023. On December 11, 2023, Jane Doe and John Doe filed an opposition. On December 15, 2023, Jane Doe and John Doe filed a supplemental opposition.
PARTIES’ REQUESTS
Brown and Black Pyramid ask the Court to consolidate case numbers 21STCV13947 and 21STCV24811.
Avila, Jane Doe, and John Doe ask the Court to deny the motions.
LEGAL STANDARD
“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.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a).)
California Rules of Court, rule 3.350(a), provides:
“(a) Requirements of motion
“(1) A notice of motion to consolidate must:
“(A) List all named parties in each case, the names of those who have appeared, and the names of their respective attorneys of record;
“(B) Contain the captions of all the cases sought to be consolidated, with the lowest numbered case shown first; and
“(C) Be filed in each case sought to be consolidated.
“(2) The motion to consolidate:
“(A) Is deemed a single motion for the purpose of determining the appropriate filing fee, but memorandums, declarations, and other supporting papers must be filed only in the lowest numbered case;
“(B) Must be served on all attorneys of record and all nonrepresented parties in all of the cases sought to be consolidated; and
“(C) Must have a proof of service filed as part of the motion.”
(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.350(a).)
Los Angeles County Superior Court Local Rule 3.3(g) provides: “(1) Cases may not be consolidated unless they are in the same department. 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. (2) Upon consolidation of cases, the first filed case will be the lead case, unless otherwise ordered by the court. After consolidation, all future papers to be filed in the consolidated case must be filed only in the case designated as the lead case. (3) Before consolidation of a limited case with an unlimited case, the limited case must be reclassified as an unlimited case and the reclassification fee paid.”
DISCUSSION
On December 12, 2020, while Jane Doe was working at Brown’s home, a dog who was on the premises allegedly attacked and injured her. Avila, Jane Doe’s sister, was also working at Brown’s home and allegedly heard Jane Doe screaming. Jane Doe (along with her husband John Doe) and Avila filed separate actions against Brown, Black Pyramid, and Doe defendants seeking damages arising from the alleged attack.
Based on these alleged facts, Brown and Black Pyramid seek consolidation of the two actions for all purposes, including discovery and trial.
In her opposition, Avila argues that consolidation is unwarranted because (1) the two cases assert different causes of action and seek different types of damages, (2) Jane Doe’s workers’ compensation case could substantially delay trial of Avila’s case, (3) Jane Doe’s case will involve far more witnesses than Avila’s case, (4) counsel for Jane Doe and John Doe may unfairly benefit from the work product of Avila’s counsel, (5) a motion to vacate Brown’s default is pending in 21STCV24811, (6) the lack of discovery in 21STCV24811 may delay the trial in 21STCV13947 if the cases are consolidated, (7) Brown and Black Pyramid delayed in filing a motion to consolidate, and (8) consolidation will substantially increase the costs of litigation.
In her opposition, Jane Doe raises many of the points made in Avila’s opposition and also argues that (1) there is no risk of inconsistent judgments, (2) consolidation will result in a delay in Jane Doe’s trial in 21STCV24811, (3) discovery in 21STCV24811 is closed but discovery in 21STCV13947 remains open.
The
Court has considered the parties’ arguments and finds that the cases involve
common questions of fact or law and should be consolidated. If duplicative discovery is sought, the
objecting party may seek Court intervention.
CONCLUSION
The Court GRANTS the motions to consolidate filed by Defendants Chris Brown and Black Pyramid, LLC. Case number 21STCV13947 and case number 21STCV24811 are consolidated for all purposes in Department 28 of the Spring Street Courthouse. Case number 21STCV13947 remains the lead case.
Moving parties are ordered to give notice of this ruling.
Moving parties are ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.