Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 22STCV31039, Date: 2024-02-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV31039    Hearing Date: February 7, 2024    Dept: 29

Motion for Leave to Intervene filed by Plaintiff-in-Intervention County of San Bernardino.

Tentative

The motion is granted.

Background

Plaintiff Blanca Robles (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint on September 22, 2022, against Cara Darlena, Guillermo Santana, Jr., and Does 1 to 10 for motor vehicle negligence and general negligence based on an auto accident on September 24, 2020.

On April 3, 2023, County of San Bernardino (“Moving Party”) filed this motion for leave to intervene. Moving Party alleges that at the time of the accident, Plaintiff was acting in the course and scope of her employment with Moving Party. (Motion, 3:6-8.)

No party has filed an opposition.

Legal Standard

“A nonparty shall petition the court for leave to intervene by noticed motion or ex parte application.  The petition shall include a copy of the proposed complaint in intervention or answer in intervention and set forth the grounds upon which intervention rests.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 387(c).)

“The court shall, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the action or proceeding if either of the following conditions is satisfied:

(A)¿A provision of law confers an unconditional right to intervene.

(B)¿The person seeking intervention claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action and that person is so situated that the disposition of the action may impair or impede that person’s ability to protect that interest, unless that person’s interest is adequately represented by one or more of the existing parties.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 387(d)(1).)

Where an employee brings an action for damages proximately caused by a third person, an employer who pays or becomes obligated to pay compensation, or salary in lieu of compensation, may likewise make a claim or bring an action against the third person.  (Lab. Code, § 3852.)  “[T]he employer may recover in the same suit, in addition to the total amount of compensation, damages for which he or she was liable including all salary, wage, pension, or other emolument paid to the employee or to his or her dependents.”  (Ibid.) 

“A workers’ compensation carrier is authorized to attempt recovery of benefits paid either through the maintenance of an independent action (Lab. Code, § 3852), intervention in the employee’s action (Lab. Code, § 3853), or assertion of lien rights in the employee’s recovery (Lab. Code, § 3856, subd. (b).)”  (Catello v. I.T.T. General Controls (1984) 152 Cal.App.3d 1009, 1015, fn. 7.)

If leave to intervene is granted by the court, the intervenor shall separately file the complaint in intervention and serve notice of the court’s decision” to parties who have appeared. (Code Civ. Proc. § 387(e).)

Discussion

In order to intervene in an action, the intervening party must timely file a motion to intervene in the action or proceeding and establish a basis to intervene.

Here, on September 22, 2022, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendants. Moving Party filed this motion to intervene over less than a year later on April 3, 2023. Moving Party contends this motion is timely as a trial on the facts has not commenced. (Motion, 4:10.) Further, Moving Party contends there is an unconditional right to intervene under Labor Code section 3853. (Id., 3-4:28,1-2.)

Moving Party attaches its complaint in intervention as Exhibit A.

The Court finds Intervening Party has acted timely in its motion to intervene. Further, the Court finds the Moving Party has shown an adequate basis for intervention..

Therefore, Moving Party’s motion to intervene is GRANTED.

Conclusion

The Court GRANTS the motion for leave to intervene filed by County of San Bernardino.

The Court GRANTS County of San Bernardino leave to file the proposed¿complaint-in-intervention attached to the motion within 10 days.¿¿

Moving Party is to give notice.