Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 24SMCV02065, Date: 2024-09-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24SMCV02065    Hearing Date: September 26, 2024    Dept: 207

TENTATIVE RULING

BACKGROUND

This case arises from a dispute between homeowners and their building contractor.  Plaintiffs Lauren Entner Nabi and Ryan Nabi (“Plaintiffs”) hired Defendants Paragon Marketing & Consulting Inc. dba Paragon Builders, a California Corporation and dba Paragon Builders (“Paragon”) and Guy Liba (“Liba”) (together, “Defendants”) in July 2023 to convert Plaintiffs’ garage into an accessory dwelling unit (“ADU”). 

On May 2, 2024, Plaintiffs filed suit against Defendants, alleging four causes of action for (1) breach of contract; (2) negligence; (3) negligent misrepresentation; and (4) unfair business practices.

On June 28, 2024, Defendants filed a complaint against Plaintiffs, case number 24SMCV03159, alleging seven causes of action for (1) breach of contract; (2) foreclosure of mechanic’s lien; (3) open book account; (4) account stated; (5) quantum meruit; (6) unfair business practices; and (7) prompt payment penalties, arising from the same dispute concerning the same July 2023 agreement to convert Plaintiffs’ garage to an ADU.

The actions, 24SMCV02065 and 24SMCV03159, were related on September 17, 2024.

Plaintiffs now move to consolidate both actions for all purposes.  The motion is unopposed.

ANALYSIS

Procedural Requirements

            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 “involve[e] a common question of law or fact.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a).)

            Both cases were related on September 17, 2024, and are currently pending before the same department.  Therefore, the Court finds no procedural hurdles to consolidation.

            Substantive Requirements

Code of Civil Procedure section 1048, subdivision (a) provides:

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.

            Both cases involve the same dispute among the same parties, concerning the same July 2023 agreement for Defendants to convert Plaintiffs’ garage to an ADU.  Thus, both cases will inevitably involve common questions of law and fact. 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Therefore, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion to consolidate Nabi v. Liba (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2024, No. 24SMCV02065) with Paragon v. Nabi (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2024, No. 24SMCV03159).    

The Court further orders that the cases are consolidated for all purposes and Nabi v. Liba (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2024, No. 24SMCV02065) 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 Paragon v. Nabi (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2024, No. 24SMCV03159) are vacated.

            Plaintiffs shall provide notice of the Court’s ruling and file the notice with a proof of service forthwith.

DATED:  September 26, 2024                                               ___________________________

                                                                                          Michael E. Whitaker

                                                                                          Judge of the Superior Court