Judge Salvatore Sirna, Case Number: 24PSCV00086, Date: 2024-02-15 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 24PSCV00086, Date: 2024-02-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24PSCV00086 Hearing Date: February 15, 2024 Dept: G

Plaintiff Cynthia Shepard’s Motion for Consolidation

Respondent: Defendant Ellen Shepard O’Connor

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Cynthia Shepard’s Motion for Consolidation is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

This is an action to quiet title. In 1979, Plaintiff Cynthia Shepard and Stephen L. Shepard, as husband and wife, and Stephen Shepard’s sister, Defendant Ellen Shepard O’Connor, allegedly purchased a property in Claremont as joint tenants, although the original deed apparently omitted Cynthia Shepard’s name. In 2017, Stephen Shepard died and left behind a will that allegedly confirmed Cynthia Shepard’s interest in the Claremont property. Shepard O’Connor also allegedly assured Cynthia Shepard that Shepard O’Connor would not seek an ouster or partition. In September 2023, Shepard O’Connor recorded an Affidavit of Death of Joint Tenant and in November 2023, Shepard O’Connor initiated an unlawful detainer action against Cynthia Shepard, alleging Cynthia Shepard occupied the Claremont property through a tenancy-at-will and not as a joint tenant.

On January 9, 2024, Cynthia Shepard filed a complaint against Shepard O’Connor, all persons unknown, and Does 1-10, alleging a single cause of action to quiet title.

On January 25, 2024, Cynthia Shepard filed the present motion. A hearing on the motion is set for February 15, with a case management conference and OSC Re: Failure to File Proof of Service on June 5.

ANALYSIS

Cynthia Shepard moves to consolidate the present action with an unlawful detainer action brought by Shepard O’Connor (LASC Case No. 23WCUD02441). For the following reasons, the court GRANTS Cynthia Shepard’s motion.

Legal Standard

Code of Civil Procedure section 1048 grants trial courts discretion to consolidate actions involving common questions of law or fact. The purpose of consolidation is to eliminate unnecessary costs or delays by avoiding duplication of procedure, especially when there are issues common to both actions. (Estate of Baker (1982) 131 Cal.App.3d 471, 485.)

Discussion

In this case, Cynthia Shepard argues both cases involve common questions of law and fact. In the unlawful detainer action, Shepard O’Connor’s Complaint alleges Cynthia Shepard occupies the Claremont property pursuant to a tenancy-at-will. In the present action, the Complaint alleges Cynthia Shepard occupies the Claremont property as a joint tenant. Based on these allegations, it is apparent both cases arise from the same issue regarding Cynthia Shepard’s ownership of the Claremont property.

In Martin-Bragg v. Moore (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 367 (Martin-Bragg), the court held it was an abuse of discretion for the court to deny a motion to consolidate an action to quiet title with an unlawful detainer action when complex title issues were involved. (Id., at p. 391.) While the court acknowledged there were legitimate concerns about the loss of the unlawful detainer action’s summary procedures, the court also noted that the trial court could not disregard the need for reasonable discovery when complex issues involving conflicting ownership claims are being tried. (Id., at p. 389.)

Like Martin-Bragg, the present actions also involve a complex title dispute with competing claims of ownership between Cynthia Shepard and Shepard O’Connor. Thus, the court finds it is necessary to consolidate the present actions. And while Shepard O’Connor has filed an opposition to Cynthia Shepard’s motion, the opposition fails to address or distinguish Martin-Bragg.

Accordingly, Cynthia Shepard’s motion is GRANTED.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, Cynthia Shepard’s motion to consolidate is GRANTED. Case 23WCUD02441 is consolidated with Case 24PSCV00086. The lead case shall be 24PSCV00086.