Judge: Thomas S. Mcconville, Case: 2019-01059839, Date: 2023-05-22 Tentative Ruling
Defendant Loan Oak Fund’s (“Defendant”) unopposed Motion to Transfer and Consolidate Actions is GRANTED.
Defendant’s motion relates to the current action pending before this court (“Wang-OC Action”) and Wang, et al. v. Wong, et. al., Case No. 19PSCV00290 pending in Los Angeles Superior Court (“Wang-LA Action”). Defendant seeks to transfer and consolidate the Wang-LA Action to Orange County Superior Court to be heard with the Wang-OC Action. Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 403 describes the pertinent legal standard for addressing Defendant’s motion to transfer, and CCP section 1048 describes the legal standard for Defendant’s motion to consolidate. In short, upon a motion a judge may order a transfer of “an action involving a common question of fact or law” when the matter is not complex. CCP 1048 provides that actions may be consolidated when they involve “a common question of law or fact” and may be heard in “a joint . . . trial of any or all of the matters in issue in the actions.”
California Rules of Court, Rule 3.500, details how a transfer motion must be presented.
Defendant has satisfied the requirements described above.
In support of its motion, Defendant filed the Declaration of Candie Y. Chang which establishes that the Wang-LA Action and the Wang-OC Action are not complex and involve common questions of fact and law and that the transfer would not unnecessarily inconvenience the parties, witnesses or counsel and addresses all the other factors listed in Rule 3.5000 as follows:
n Both actions involve the same parties, same counsel, same causes of action, same cross-claims, and both cases are at issue (see Motion, pp. 10-11 (comparison chart));
n Both actions involve claims that have arisen out of the same underlying events and occurrences, and Plaintiffs’ agreements with their agent, Fai Wong. In both action plaintiffs allege they were defrauded by Fai Wong and Liming Jiang into signing powers of attorney, which led to the encumbrances on real property in Orange and Los Angeles Counties, including loans made by Defendant which were secured by the real property. Plaintiffs seek identical relief in both actions based on the same arguments.
n The only difference in the two actions is that Wang-LA Action concerns real property located in Hacienda Heights, California in Los Angeles County and the Wang-OC Action concerns real property located at 500 W. Las Palmas Drive, Fullerton, CA.
n Both cases involve the testimony of the same party as well as percipient witnesses and will also require the same experts to offer the same opinions at trial.
n At this time, there is no trial date set in the Wang – LA Action and consolidation will avoid further delay and promote resolution of the actions by trial or settlement.
n The LA Action became at issue on October 25, 2022.
(See Chang Decl., ¶¶ 4-9, 11.)
The declaration also establishes that counsel for Defendant met and conferred with all parties concerning the transfer and consolidation and the motion was filed in the Wang-LA Action and served on all parties in said action. (See Chang Decl., ¶¶ 3 [QUALFAX agreed to the coordination, but Plaintiffs stated they did not agree even though consolidation was first sought by Plaintiffs in 2022] and 17.)
Based on the above, the court finds that the transfer will promote the ends of justice, as (1) The actions are not complex; (2) common questions of fact or law predominate the litigation, and those common questions are significant to the litigation; (3) the transfer will be convenient to the parties, witnesses, and counsel; (4) the Wang-OC Action was first filed, and has a trial date set; (5) It will be more efficient from a judicial perspective to utilize a single judicial facility and its staff; (6) The court makes no findings relative to LA Superior Court’s calendar, but the Wang-OC matter has already been set for trial; (7) There is a chance that there could be inconsistent or duplicative rulings, orders or judgments should the matters not be transferred, which is an obvious disadvantage to denying this motion; and (8) The court makes no findings regarding the likelihood of settlement of the actions without further litigation should coordination be denied.
The Court ORDERS the action entitled Wang, et al. v. Wong, et. al., Case No. 19PSCV00290 now pending in the Los Angeles Superior Court – Pomona Courthouse (the “Wang-LA Action”) transferred to this Court and consolidated with this action (the “Wang-OC Action”) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 403, and those matters consolidated pursuant to CCP 1048.
Moving Party shall give notice.