Judge: Serena R. Murillo, Case: 22STCV18668, Date: 2022-09-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV18668    Hearing Date: September 8, 2022    Dept: 29

Larisa P. Yevtushenko v. Corey Brooker, et al.

TENTATIVE

Plaintiff Larisa Yevtushenko’s motion to change venue is GRANTED.

Legal Standard

“Venue is determined based on the complaint on file at the time the motion to change venue is made.”  (Brown v. Superior Court of Alameda County (1984) 37 Cal.3d 477, 482.) 

Where a complaint alleges injury to a person or personal property, venue is proper where some or all of the defendants reside. (Code Civ. Proc. § 395.) Where a complaint alleges personal injury “from wrongful act or negligence . . . the county where the injury occurs . . . shall be a proper county for the trial of the action.” (Cacciaguidi v. Superior Court (1990) 226 Cal.App.3d 181, 184-185.)

Under Code of Civil Procedure 397(a), the court may, on motion, change the place of trial in the following cases: (a) When the court designated in the complaint is not the proper court. (Code Civ. Proc § 397(a).)

Discussion

Plaintiff moves to transfer venue to Sacramento County pursuant to CCP section 397(a). She argues that venue in Los Angeles County is improper as the defendants reside in Sacramento and the alleged dog bite occurred in Sacramento. (Senftner Decl., ¶ 4.) Counsel for Plaintiff avers that she filed in Los Angeles to preserve Plaintiff’s claim as the statute of limitations was expiring and the Sacramento Court was closed for filing. (Id., ¶ 3.) 

As such, because Defendants reside in Sacramento County and Plaintiff’s alleged injuries occurred in Sacramento, Plaintiff’s motion to change venue to Sacramento County is GRANTED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.