Judge: Stephen P. Pfahler, Case: 22CHCV00289, Date: 2022-08-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22CHCV00289    Hearing Date: August 2, 2022    Dept: F49

Dept. F-49

Date: 8-2-22

Case # 22CHCV00289

Trial Date: Not Set

BIFURCATE

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff, Dunn Investment Properties, Inc.

RESPONDING PARTY: Unopposed/Defendant, Charles Johnson

RELIEF REQUESTED

Motion to Bifurcate

SUMMARY OF ACTION

On May 10, 2022, Plaintiff Dunn Investment Properties, Inc. filed a complaint for Unlawful Detainer against Charles and Sheila Johnson. Plaintiff alleges rent increased from $7,411 to $20,000/month as of January 1, 2022. Defendant failed to make the lease payments due in March and April, 2022, with an outstanding balance of $39,112 as of the complaint filing date.

On June 30, 2022, the court sustained the demurrer to the complaint. Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint for unlawful detainer on July 6, 2022.

RULING: Denied

Plaintiff, Dunn Investment Properties, Inc. moves to bifurcate the trial in order to adjudicate possession separate and apart from damages. Plaintiff moves to bifurcate in order to allow adjudication of the possession claim in a motion for summary adjudication, with later consideration of the holdover damages claim. The court electronic filing system shows no opposition or reply at the time of the tentative ruling publication cutoff.

Code of Civil Procedure section 598 states in part:

The court may, when the convenience of witnesses, the ends of justice, or the economy and efficiency of handling the litigation would be promoted thereby, on motion of a party, after notice and hearing, make an order, no later than the close of pretrial conference in cases in which such pretrial conference is to be held, or, in other cases, no later than 30 days before the trial date, that the trial of any issue or any part thereof shall precede the trial of any other issue or any part thereof in the case, except for special defenses which may be tried first pursuant to Sections 597 and 597.5.

As to whether bifurcation of certain causes of action is proper, section 1048, subdivision (b), of the California Code of Civil Procedure provides:

The court, in furtherance of convenience or to avoid prejudice, or when separate trials will be conducive to expedition and economy, may order a separate trial of any cause of action, including a cause of action asserted in a cross-complaint, or of any separate issue or of any number of causes of action or issues, preserving the right of trial by jury required by the Constitution or a statute of this state or of the United States.

The court finds the subject motion unnecessary, and will not yield greater efficiency or minimize prejudice. The summary nature of existing unlawful detainer statutory rules allow for adjudication of possession without the necessity of a bifurcation order. (Northrop Corp. v. Chaparral Energy, Inc. (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d 725, 729.) If and when possession is resolved, the court, in its discretion, may reserve adjudication of the holdover damages claim to a later proceeding.

Motion for summary judgment and demurrer to the first amended complaint set for August 22 and October 6, 2022, respectively.

Plaintiff to give notice.