Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 24STCV17120, Date: 2024-12-09 Tentative Ruling



Case Number: 24STCV17120    Hearing Date: December 9, 2024    Dept: 54

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

 

Daniel Gonzalez,

 

 

 

Plaintiff,

 

Case No.:

 

 

24STCV17120 (Related to 24STCV21413)

 

vs.

 

 

Tentative Ruling

 

 

On Deck Delivery, LLC, et al.,

 

 

 

Defendants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hearing Date: December 9, 2024

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion to Consolidate

Moving Party: Plaintiff Daniel Gonzalez

Responding Party: None

 

T/R:      PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE IS GRANTED. Daniel Gonzalez v. On Deck Delivery, LLC, et al. Case Number 24STCV17120 will be the lead case.

 

PLAINTIFF TO NOTICE.

 

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at SMCdept54@lacourt.org with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing.

The Court considers the moving papers. No opposition has been received.

 

“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.”  (CCP § 1048(a).)

 

Plaintiff moves to consolidate (1) Daniel Gonzalez v. On Deck Delivery, LLC, et al. Case Number 24STCV17120 (Gonzalez); and (2) Angelo Terrones v. On Deck Delivery, LLC, et al. Case Number 24STCV21413 (Terrones).

 

Plaintiff argues that the cases should be consolidated because they contain common issues of law and fact. Both cases are employment actions against On Deck Delivery, where the Plaintiffs worked as delivery drivers. Plaintiff asserts that they involve the same causes of action for wage and hour violations under the same employment policies. Defendants do not oppose this motion.

 

The Court finds that there are common issues of fact and law, making consolidation appropriate. Plaintiff’s motion to consolidate is GRANTED.