Judge: Lynne M. Hobbs, Case: 21STCV13383, Date: 2023-11-17 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV13383    Hearing Date: March 11, 2024    Dept: 30

NICHOLAS HENRY vs OSCAR CALDERON, et al.

TENTATIVE

Defendant’s motion to consolidate with related case is DENIED without prejudice. Moving party is ordered to give notice.

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).) The purpose of consolidation is to enhance trial court efficiency by avoiding unnecessary duplication of evidence and the danger of inconsistent adjudications. (See Todd-Stenberg v. Dalkon Shield Claimants Trust (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 976, 978-979.)

A Notice of Motion to consolidate cases must (1) include a list of all named parties in each case, the names of those who have appeared, and the names of their respective attorneys of record; (2) include the captions of all the cases sought to be consolidated; and (3) be filed in each case sought to be consolidated. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.350(a)(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.” (Super. Ct. L.A. County, Local Rules, rule 3.3(g)(1).)

Discussion

Defendants move for consolidation of this case with 21STCV26619, arguing that both cases involve the same collision and the same parties. Plaintiff in this case was a passenger in Plaintiff Dunn’s car, which was involved in a collision with Defendant Calderon’s vehicle.

This action and 21STCV26619 were deemed related on October 7, 2021, and were both assigned to Department 28. However, only 21STCV13383 was transferred to this department (Department 30), on October 12, 2021 in an inventory transfer. As a result, the motion cannot be granted under Local Rules rule 3.3(g)(1) because they are not in the same department. 

Further, Defendant has not filed the notice of motion to consolidate in related case 21STCV26619. Defendant has thus not complied with CRC Rule 3.350(a)(1).