Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 21STCV43026, Date: 2023-08-30 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV43026    Hearing Date: August 30, 2023    Dept: 28

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

BACKGROUND 

A.   Case no. 21STCV43026 

On November 22, 2021, Plaintiff Marius Spada (“Spada”) filed an action against Defendants Cal-West Fire Protection Specialist (“Cal-West”), J.R. Lennen Construction, Inc. (“JR”), Blink Fitness (“BF”), Blink Holdings, Inc. (“BH”), Blink 16123 Belleflower Blvd., Inc. (“BBB”), and Shadrall Bellflower, LP (“SB”) for premises liability and general negligence.  Plaintiff later amended the complaint to include Defendants Auburndale Properties, L.L.C. (“AP LLC”), Auburndale Properties, Inc. (“AP Inc.”), Aldi Foods Inc. (“AF”), Aldi Inc. (“Aldi”), and Al California LLC (“Al”). 

On January 28, 2022, BBB and Cal-West filed answers. 

On February 18, 2022, SB filed an answer and a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendants Roes 101-150 for breach of contract, express indemnification, implied indemnity, comparative contribution, total equitable indemnity and declaratory relief. 

On March 21, 2022, JR filed an answer. 

On September 12, 2022, AF, Aldi and Al filed an answer and a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendants BF, BH, BBB, Cal-West and JR for breach of contract, breach of contract to provide insurance, express indemnity, implied equitable indemnity, contribution, negligence and declaratory relief. On October 14, 2022, BBB, Cal-West and JR filed an answer. 

On June 7, 2022, AP Inc. and AP LLC filed an answer and a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendants Moes 101-150 for breach of contract, express indemnification, implied indemnity, comparative contribution, total equitable indemnity and declaratory relief. 

B.   Case no. 22STCV13852 

On April 26, 2022, Plaintiff Lillie James (“James”) filed an action against Defendants Cal-West, JR, BF, BH, BBB, SB, AP Inc. and AP LLC for general negligence (loss of consortium) and premises liability (loss of consortium). 

On June 30, 2022, Cal-West, BBB and JR filed answers.  On July 15, 2022, SB, AP Inc. and AP LLC filed an answer. 

C.   The Court relates and consolidates the cases 

On June 27, 2022, the Court found that case numbers 21STCV43026 and 22STCV13852 are related within the meaning of California Rules of Court, rule 3.300(a).  On July 28, 2022, the Court consolidated the cases for all purposes. 

D.   Motion for leave to file a complaint-in-intervention 

On May 19, 2023, Compwest Insurance Company filed a motion for leave to file a complaint-in-intervention to be heard on August 30, 2023.  No opposition has been filed. 

Trial is currently scheduled for October 24, 2023. 

INTERVENOR’S REQUEST 

Compwest Insurance Company requests that the Court grant it leave to file a complaint-in-intervention. 

LEGAL STANDARD 

Code of Civil Procedure section 387, subdivision (d)(2), provides: “The court may, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the action or proceeding if the person has an interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of either of the parties, or an interest against both."  

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 387, subdivision (d)(1), "[t]he court shall, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the action or proceeding if either of the following conditions is satisfied: (A) A provision of law confers an unconditional right to intervene.  (B) The person seeking intervention claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action and that person is so situated that the disposition of the action may impair or impede that person's ability to protect that interest, unless that person's interest is adequately represented by one or more of the existing parties." 

"A nonparty shall petition the court for leave to intervene by noticed motion or ex parte application.  The petition shall include a copy of the proposed complaint in intervention or answer in intervention and set forth the grounds upon which intervention rests."  (Code Civ. Proc., § 387, subd. (c).)

DISCUSSION 

Compwest Insurance Company requests that the Court grant it leave to file a complaint-in-intervention under California Labor Code provisions providing subrogation and intervention rights to workers’ compensation carriers.  Having paid benefits to Spada, Compwest Insurance Company has a right to intervene in the action. The Court grants the motion. 

CONCLUSION 

The Court GRANTS Compwest Insurance Company's motion for leave to file a complaint-in-intervention.  Compwest Insurance Company is ordered to file its complaint-in-intervention within 15 days of the hearing on this motion. 

Compwest Insurance Company is ordered to give notice of this ruling. 

Compwest Insurance Company is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.