Judge: Richard B. Ulmer, Jr., Case: CGC23604065, Date: 2023-04-28 Tentative Ruling
Matter on calendar for Friday, April 28, 2023, Line 12, DEFENDANT KENSINGTON APARTMENT PROPERTIES, LLC'S Motion To Stay Or Dismiss Case And/Or For Protective Order Defendant Kensington Apartment Properties, LLC's motion to stay or dismiss this case pending resolution of a prior pending federal district court and/or for a protective order is granted as follows: the action is entirely stayed. This includes all discovery. Kensington Apartment Properties' request for judicial notice is granted. "It is black letter law that, when a Federal action has been filed covering the same subject matter as is involved in a California action, the California court has the discretion but not the obligation to stay the state court action." Caiafa Prof. Law Corp. v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 800, 804. "In exercising its discretion the court should consider the importance of discouraging multiple litigation designed solely to harass an adverse party, and of avoiding unseemly conflicts with the courts of other jurisdictions. It should also consider whether the rights of the parties can best be determined by the court of the other jurisdiction because of the nature of the subject matter, the availability of witnesses, or the stage to which the proceedings in the other court have already advanced." Id. Here, Kensington moves for an order staying or dismissing this case and/or for a protective order staying all discovery pending resolution of a previously filed case currently pending in the Northern District Court of California, captioned Kensington Apartment Properties v. Loanvest IX LP et al., N.D. Cal. Case No. 19-cv-05749-VC. In opposition, Plaintiff George Cresson argues that he entered into a "settlement agreement" between himself and Kensington to settle two lawsuits, which includes the above-named federal action, and this case should proceed. Opp., 2:7; 3:1-2. Cresson participated in several settlement conferences since filing this case (RJN, Ex. 1). The federal judge rejected his contention that the case was settled and set a trial date for May 2023, just a few weeks from now. Jacobs Dec., 2:6-11. Accordingly this state case is stayed pending the resolution of the federal case. At the conclusion of the federal case and when the time for appeal has elapsed, the parties must either dismiss this state case, move for a dismissal of this state case, or move to dissolve this stay. For the 9:30 a.m. Law & Motion calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number. Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and