Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: BC681251, Date: 2023-01-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC681251    Hearing Date: January 27, 2023    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: January 27, 2023

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion for Leave to Intervene

Moving Party: Intervenor Data Leverage LLC

Responding Party: Dismissed Former Defendants David Vayntrub and Irina Vayntrub and Plaintiff Farmhouse DTLA

T/R:    DATA LEVERAGE LLC’S MOTION TO INTERVENE IS GRANTED.

            Intervenor 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, opposition, and reply.

CCP § 387(d)(1) provides that the court shall, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the action or proceeding if “a provision of law confers an unconditional right to intervene,” or “[t]he 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.” Additionally, upon timely application, a court may “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.” (CCP § 387(d)(2).)

Data Leverage LLC (DL) moves to intervene in this action. DL asserts it has a 25% ownership interest in Defendant Los Angeles Farmers, Inc. (LAF.) It contends the receivership appointed for LAF may impair or impede its ability protect its interest in LAF. DL represents that Larissa Rubin assigned her 25% interest in LAF (formerly Absolute Herbal Pain Solutions) and her potential causes of action against the parties in this action to DL. This is sufficient to establish a right to intervene in the action.

In opposition, Plaintiff Farmhouse DTLA and dismissed former Defendants David Vayntrub and Irina Vayntrub argue the motion should be denied because DL is a suspended corporation, the motion is untimely, and because DL agreed to arbitrate any claims against the parties. The Court declines to deny the motion on these grounds. DL represents that it has applied for reinstatement of its corporate status in California and learned of the lawsuit only eight months ago. An agreement to arbitrate does not prohibit an individual from filing an action in court as a matter of law.

DL’s motion is GRANTED.