Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 21STCV30629, Date: 2023-11-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV30629    Hearing Date: March 25, 2024    Dept: 28

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. 

BACKGROUND 

A.   Case number 21STCV30629 

On August 19, 2021, Plaintiff Everilda Ruano (“Ruano”) filed an action against Defendants Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez and Does 1-100 for motor vehicle tort and general negligence. (Case number 21STCV30629.) 

On October 19, 2021, Defendant Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez filed an answer. 

On February 2, 2023, counsel informed the Court that Defendant Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez had passed away. 

On September 11, 2023, Defendant Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez filed a motion to consolidate this case with case number 21STCV34221, titled Manuel Cardenas v. Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez and Does 1 to 30. The motion stated that Defendant Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez had passed away on January 1, 2022.  

On November 7, 2023, the Court continued the motion to consolidate to November 20, 2023, noting that (1) the cases had not been related and (2) Plaintiff had not filed an amendment naming a new defendant. 

On November 8, 2023, the Court found that case numbers 21STCV30629 and 21STCV34221 are related within the meaning of California Rules of Court, rule 3.300(a).  Case number 21STCV30629 became the lead case. The cases were assigned to Department 28 at the Spring Street Courthouse for all purposes. 

On November 13, 2023, Ruano amended the complaint to include Defendant Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez as Doe 1. 

On November 20, 2023, the Court denied the September 11, 2023 motion to consolidate without prejudice because (1) no successor-in-interest had been named for Defendant Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez and the complaint had not been amended to replace him with another defendant, (2) although Plaintiff named the Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez as a Doe defendant, the Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez did not file the motion to consolidate and did not stand in the shoes of Defendant Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez for purposes of the motion. 

On January 29, 2024, Defendant Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez, deceased (erroneously sued as “Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez”) filed an answer to Ruano’s complaint. 

On February 22, 2024, Defendant Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez, deceased (erroneously sued as “Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez”) filed a motion to consolidate case numbers 21STCV30629 and 21STCV34221. 

No trial is currently scheduled. 

B.   Case number 21STCV34221 

On September 16, 2021, Plaintiff Manuel Cardenas (“Cardenas”) filed an action against Defendant Juan Gutierrez and Does 1-10 for motor vehicle tort and general negligence. (Case number 21STCV34221.) 

On November 4, 2021, Defendant Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez filed an answer. 

On January 3, 2023, Cardenas amended the complaint to add Defendant Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez, deceased, as Doe 1. 

On November 8, 2023, the Court found that case numbers 21STCV30629 and 21STCV34221 are related within the meaning of California Rules of Court, rule 3.300(a).  Case number 21STCV30629 became the lead case. The cases were assigned to Department 28 at the Spring Street Courthouse for all purposes. 

Trial is currently scheduled for September 3, 2024. 

PARTY’S REQUEST 

          Defendant Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez, deceased (erroneously sued as “Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez”) asks the Court to consolidate case numbers 21STCV30629 and 21STCV34221. 

LEGAL STANDARD 

          Code of Civil Procedure section 1048, subdivision (a), provides: 

“(a) 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 

          Defendant Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez, deceased (erroneously sued as “Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez”) (“Moving Party”) has filed a motion to consolidate case numbers 21STCV30629 and 21STCV34221.  Moving Party filed the motion in case number 21STCV30629.  However, Moving Party did not file a notice of the motion in case number 21STCV34221.  (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.350(a)(1)(C).)  The Court denies the motion. 

CONCLUSION 

The Court DENIES the motion to consolidate filed by Defendant Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez, deceased (erroneously sued as “Estate of Juan De La Cruz Gutierrez”) on February 22, 2024 without prejudice. 

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling. 

Moving party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.