Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 22STCV16654, Date: 2023-05-09 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV16654 Hearing Date: May 9, 2023 Dept: 32
PLEASE NOTE: Parties are
encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if
a resolution may be reached. If the
parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this
tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit. The email shall include the case number, date
and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the
identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling. If the Court does not receive an email
indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no
appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or
adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. If all parties do not submit on this
tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely (which is
highly encouraged). Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative
ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the
subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.
TENTATIVE RULING
|
DEPARTMENT |
32 |
|
HEARING DATE |
May 9, 2023 |
|
CASE NUMBER |
22STCV07927- Related to Case No. 22STCV16654 |
|
MOTION |
Motion to Consolidate |
|
MOVING PARTY |
Defendants County of Los Angeles and Christopher William
Gussman |
|
OPPOSING PARTY |
None |
MOTION
Defendants County of Los Angeles and
Christopher William Gussman (collectively, Defendants) move to consolidate Victor
Curiel, et. al. v. Christopher William
Gussman, et al. (Super. Ct. L.A.
County, 2022, No. 22STCV07927) with Logan Shingo Thatcher v. Christopher
William Gussman, et al. (Super. Ct.
L.A. County, 2022, No. 22STCV16654) for all purposes. The motion is unopposed.
ANALYSIS
Per Local Rule 3.3, subdivision (g), “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).) Once the Court
relates the cases, the Court may consolidate the actions and order a joint
trial on matters that “involv[e] a common question of law or fact.” (Code
Civ. Proc., §1048, subd. (a).)
The Court has already related these cases, and both are pending in Department
32. Victor Curiel, et. al. v. Christopher William Gussman, et al. (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2022, No.
22STCV07927) and Logan Shingo Thatcher v. Christopher William Gussman, et
al. (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2022,
No. 22STCV16654) concern the same underlying incident, and thus, the Court
finds that substantial overlap in the factual and legal issues exists, which
supports consolidation. Moreover, consolidation
of the cases will permit the trier of fact to consider how the underlying incident
occurred, and the proportionate share of liability for each party.
CONCLUSION AND ORDER
Therefore, the Court grants Defendants’ motion to consolidate Victor
Curiel, et. al. v. Christopher William
Gussman, et al. (Super. Ct. L.A.
County, 2022, No. 22STCV07927) with Logan Shingo Thatcher v. Christopher
William Gussman, et al. (Super. Ct.
L.A. County, 2022, No. 22STCV16654).
The Court further orders that the cases are consolidated for all
purposes and Logan Shingo Thatcher v. Christopher William Gussman, et al. (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2022, No. 22STCV16654),
as requested, is designated as the lead case per California Rules of Court,
rule 3.350(b). The Court further orders
that all proceedings and hearing dates in Victor Curiel, et. al. v. Christopher William Gussman, et al. (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2022, No.
22STCV07927) are vacated.
Defendants shall provide notice of the Court’s orders and file a proof
of service of such.