Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 20STCV04202, Date: 2022-09-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV04202    Hearing Date: September 28, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On January 31, 2020, plaintiff Coral Markle (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Vanowen Gardens, LLC, the City of Los Angeles (“Defendant”), the County of Los Angeles, and Candida Property, LLC. Plaintiff alleges that on June 17, 2019, they were injured on the public sidewalk on the property located between 14639 and 14635 Vanowen Street in Van Nuys, California when their wheelchair was caught in an uplifted portion of the sidewalk.  Defendant filed its answer on April 20, 2020, but did not file a cross-complaint.  On August 31, 2022, Defendant filed this Motion seeking leave to file a cross-complaint against Cross-Complainant AT&T for indemnity, apportionment, and declaratory relief.  The Motion is unopposed.

A party shall file a cross-complaint against any of the parties who filed the complaint or cross-complaint against him or her before or at the same time as the answer to the complaint or cross-complaint.  (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 428.50 (a).)  Any other cross-complaint may be filed at any time before the court has set a date for trial.  (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 428.50 (b).)  A party shall obtain leave of court to file any cross-complaint except one filed within the time specified in subdivision (a) or (b).  Leave may be granted in the interest of justice at any time during the course of the action.  (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 428.50 (c).)  Where the proposed cross-complaint arises out of the same transaction as plaintiff’s claim, the court must grant leave to file the cross-complaint so long as defendant is acting in good faith.  (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 426.50.)

Defense counsel explains that a cross-complaint was not filed earlier because the General Civil Litigation Division of the City Attorney’s office lost approximately one-third of its trial attorneys in a span of three weeks during the months of April and May this year.  One of the senior attorneys, Kimberly Willis, passed away on April 20, 2022, four other trial attorneys abruptly left the unit, and one attorney went on stress leave.  This case was previously assigned to Evelyn Gillespie, one of the four attorneys left the unit who gave only one days’ notice of her resignation.  The matter was then reassigned to Christina Schmidt on August 3, 2022 who determined that the uplifted portion of the sidewalk has a vault that belonged to PTT, which is now AT&T.  Defendant contends that the proposed cross-complaint is being brought in good faith and there will be no prejudice because trial is not until December 28, 2022. 

Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED and the cross-complaint filed by Defendant on August 31, 2022 is deemed the operative Cross-Complaint. 

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.