Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 22STLC03594, Date: 2022-10-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STLC03594    Hearing Date: October 5, 2022    Dept: 26

MOTION TO DEEM CASES RELATED AND COORDINATE

(CCP § 404.1)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Steven M. Palmer’s Motion for Order Relating and Coordinating Cases is DENIED.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Day Lapse (CCP 12c and 1005(b)) OK

SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT: Action for motor vehicle negligence.

MOTION: Consolidate this action with the Small Claims case filed by Defendant.

OPPOSITION: None filed as of October 3, 2022.

REPLY: None filed as of October 3, 2022.

ANALYSIS:

On May 26, 2022, Plaintiff Steven M. Palmer (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for motor vehicle negligence against Defendant Vanessa Moreno (“Defendant”). On August 22, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Related Case with respect to Moreno v. Palmer, LASC Case No. 22STSC01555 (“the Small Claims action”). The Small Claims action was filed by Defendant against Plaintiff on April 22, 2022 and assigned to Department 1A. (LASC Case No., 22STSC01555, Plaintiff’s Claim, 04/22/22.) On June 21, 2022, the Small Claims Court entered judgment in favor of Defendant. (LASC Case No., 22STSC01555, Minute Order, 06/21/22.) Plaintiff filed an appeal of the judgment in the Small Claims case, which remains pending. (LASC Case No., 22STSC01555, Minute Order, 08/17/22.)

On September 8, 2022, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Deem Cases Related and Coordinate Cases in the Limited Jurisdiction Court. To date, no opposition has been filed.

Discussion

Plaintiff brings the instant Motion to Deem Cases Related and Coordinate the Cases pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 404.1, which allows for “[c]oordination of civil actions sharing a common question of fact or law . . . .” (Code Civ. Pro., § 404.1.) However, “a petition for coordination may be submitted to the Chairperson of the Judicial Council, by the presiding judge of any such court, or by any party to one of the actions after obtaining permission from the presiding judge, or by all of the parties plaintiff or defendant in any such action.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 404.1.) Plaintiff, bringing this Motion alone, has not satisfied the requirements for such a petition. Nor has Plaintiff cited any authority regarding on what grounds cases can be related. Finally, to the extent Plaintiff contends that the judge in the Small Claims court admonished the parties that both cases should be heard in Department 26 of the Limited Jurisdiction Court, no evidence is cited for such an admonishment, nor how such an admonishment should legally effectuate that result. (Motion, p. 2:8-11.) Therefore, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that the cases should, or can be, deemed related or coordinated.

Rather, a defendant in a Small Claims action who seeks to bring a cross-claim in excess of the jurisdictional limit of the Small Claims Court—as appears to be the circumstances here—must follow the procedure set forth at Code of Civil Procedure section 116.390. A motion pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 116.390 must be heard by the Small Claims Court. (Code Civ. Proc., § 116.390, subds. (a), (b), (c).)

Conclusion

Therefore, Plaintiff Steven M. Palmer’s Motion for Order Relating and Coordinating Cases is DENIED.

Court clerk to give notice.