Judge Michelle Williams Court, Case Number: 23SMCV04464, Date: 2023-11-29 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Michelle Williams Court, Case: 23SMCV04464, Date: 2023-11-29 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMCV04464 Hearing Date: November 29, 2023 Dept: 1

23SMCV04464 MIKHAIL SIRETSKIY, et al. vs AYKEM LLC, et al.

Defendants’ Motion to Transfer

TENTATIVE RULING: Defendants’ Motion to Transfer District is GRANTED and 23SMCV04464 is ordered reassigned to the Van Nuys Courthouse East in the Northwest District of the Los Angeles Superior Court. Defendants’ request for attorneys’ fees and costs is DENIED. Notice of the case reassignment shall issue shortly. Counsel for Defendants to give notice.

Judicial Notice

Defendants request the Court take judicial notice of the deed of trust, trustee’s deed upon sale, and the civil case cover sheet addendum. The requests are GRANTED as to the existence and legal effect of these documents. (Evid. Code §§ 452(c); 452(d).)

Motion to Transfer Between Judicial Districts

Standard

The Local Rules of the Los Angeles Superior Court govern the assignment of cases between its districts and departments. (Code Civ. Proc. § 402.) LASC Local Rule 2.3(b)(2) authorizes Department 1 to transfer civil cases from one judicial district to another via a noticed motion on three enumerated grounds: (1) when the case was filed in an improper district; (2) for the convenience of witnesses; or (3) to promote the ends of justice. (LASC Local Rule 2.3(b)(2).)

The Action Was Filed in an Incorrect District and a Transfer is Warranted

Defendants seek to transfer this action to the Van Nuys Courthouse East in the Northwest District of the Los Angeles Superior Court. The case is currently assigned to Department N of the Santa Monica Courthouse, which sits in the West District of the Los Angeles Superior Court. (LASC Local Rules, rule 2.2(b).)

Defendants contend the case was required to be filed in the Van Nuys Courthouse East, which sits in the district where the property is located and where Defendants reside.

In “Step 4” of this civil case cover sheet addendum where the filing party is asked to “[c]heck the appropriate boxes for the numbers shown under Column C for the type of action that you have selected. Enter the address, which is the basis for the filing location including zip code,” Plaintiffs’ counsel selected Reason 5, which corresponds to the “[l]ocation where performance required, or defendant resides,” and Reason 11, which corresponds to “Mandatory filing location (Hub Cases – unlawful detainer, limited non-collection, limited collection.).” Plaintiffs’ counsel entered the relevant address as 9663 Santa Monica Blvd. #1192, Beverly Hills, CA “9135690210.”

Defendants note the address provided is the address used by Plaintiffs’ counsel as well as the address for Cangas RE LLC on the deed of trust. (RJN Ex. A.) Defendants argue this address does not correspond to either reason listed in the addendum and cannot serve as the basis for a proper filing location.

Pursuant to Local Rule 2.3(a)(1)(B), a breach of contract action may be filed in the Central District, where performance is required by an express provision, or where defendant resides. Here, there are no allegations that performance is required in a specific location and many of the defendants reside in Tarzana, California, (Compl. ¶¶ 3-7), which is within the Northwest District.

Pursuant to Local Rule 2.3(a)(1)(B), actions concerning real property and title to real property may be filed in either the Central District or where the property is located. The complaint also seeks to quiet title to real property located at 5325 Cangas Drive, Agoura Hills, Calabasas, CA 91301, which is within the Northwest District.

The complaint asserts personal injury causes of action, which “must be filed in the judicial district where the incident arose.” (LASC Local Rules, rule 2.3(a)(1)(A).) The complaint alleges the assault and battery took place on the date of the trustee’s sale at the property. (Compl. at 22:17-22.) Other tort claims may be filed in the Central District or where the cause of action arose. (LASC Local Rules, rule 2.3(a)(1)(B).) The other tort claims, to the extent a location can be determined from the complaint, appear to have arisen at the property.

Accordingly, this action was filed in an incorrect district and should have been filed in the Northwest District under the applicable Local Rule.

Defendants are Not Entitled to Attorneys’ Fees

Defendants request reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs for filing the instant motion pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 396b(b), (Mot. at 5:4-6:11), which provides:

In its discretion, the court may order the payment to the prevailing party of reasonable expenses and attorney's fees incurred in making or resisting the motion to transfer whether or not that party is otherwise entitled to recover his or her costs of action. In determining whether that order for expenses and fees shall be made, the court shall take into consideration (1) whether an offer to stipulate to change of venue was reasonably made and rejected, and (2) whether the motion or selection of venue was made in good faith given the facts and law the party making the motion or selecting the venue knew or should have known. As between the party and his or her attorney, those expenses and fees shall be the personal liability of the attorney not chargeable to the party. Sanctions shall not be imposed pursuant to this subdivision except on notice contained in a party's papers, or on the court's own noticed motion, and after opportunity to be heard.

However, Code of Civil Procedure section 396b applies to transfers between superior courts, not districts or departments within the same court. There is only one superior court in Los Angeles County. (See generally Glade v. Glade (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 1441, 1449 (“Even though a superior court is divided into branches or departments, pursuant to California Constitution, article VI, section 4, there is only one superior court in a county and jurisdiction is therefore vested in that court, not in any particular judge or department. Whether sitting separately or together, the judges hold but one and the same court.”).) Accordingly, Defendants’ request for attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 396b(b) is DENIED.