On 04/06/2018 a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle case was filed by JOHNNY PADILLA against ARUTYUN SARGISIAN in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.
*******4387
04/06/2018
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Spring Street Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
GEORGINA T. RIZK
RAMIREZ ELSY
PADILLA JOHNNY
SARGISIAN ARUTYUN
VARGAS JAMES
10/1/2018: Demand for Jury Trial
10/1/2018: Answer
10/5/2018: Answer
1/25/2019: Notice of Related Case - Notice of Related Case
3/19/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for Minute Order (Court Order re: related cases;) of 03/19/2019
3/19/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order re: related cases;)
3/25/2019: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Issuance of Court Order re: Related Cases
4/5/2019: Notice of Deposit - Jury - Notice of Deposit - Jury
5/6/2019: Association of Attorney - Association of Attorney
6/14/2019: Motion to Compel (name extension) - Motion to Compel Deposition
4/6/2018: Summons - on Complaint
4/6/2018: Civil Case Cover Sheet
4/6/2018: Complaint
4/6/2018: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case
Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 5 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service
Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 5 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial
Hearingat 01:30 PM in Department 5 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement (CCP 877.6)
DocketHearing on Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement (CCP 877.6) scheduled for 08/29/2019 at 01:30 PM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 5
DocketMotion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement (CCP 877.6); Filed by: James Vargas (Defendant)
DocketPursuant to the request of moving party, Hearing on Motion to Compel Deposition scheduled for 07/15/2019 at 01:30 PM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 5 Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party on 06/26/2019
DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Deposition scheduled for 07/15/2019 at 01:30 PM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 5
DocketMotion to Compel Deposition; Filed by: James Vargas (Defendant)
DocketAssociation of Attorney; Filed by: Arutyun Sargisian (Defendant)
DocketNotice of Deposit - Jury; Filed by: Johnny Padilla (Plaintiff); Elsy Ramirez (Plaintiff)
DocketAnswer; Filed by: James Vargas (Defendant)
DocketAnswer; Filed by: Arutyun Sargisian (Defendant)
DocketDemand for Jury Trial; Filed by: Arutyun Sargisian (Defendant)
DocketCase assigned to Hon. Georgina T. Rizk in Department 77 Stanley Mosk Courthouse
DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 10/04/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 77
DocketOrder to Show Cause - Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 04/09/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 77
DocketComplaint; Filed by: Johnny Padilla (Plaintiff); Elsy Ramirez (Plaintiff); As to: Arutyun Sargisian (Defendant); James Vargas (Defendant)
DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Johnny Padilla (Plaintiff); Elsy Ramirez (Plaintiff)
DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Clerk
DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk
Case Number: 18STLC04387 Hearing Date: December 10, 2019 Dept: 5
|
johnny padilla, et al.,
Plaintiffs, v.
arutyun sargisian, et al.
Defendants. |
Case No.: 18STLC04387 (related to BC707385)
Hearing Date: December 10, 2019
[TENTATIVE] order RE: MOTION TO consolidate
|
Defendant Arutyun Sargisian (“Defendant”) moves to reclassify the above-referenced case as an unlimited civil case and then seeks to consolidate it with another unlimited civil case: James Vargas v. Arutyun Sargisian (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2018, No. BC707385). Plaintiffs Johnny Padilla and Elsy Ramirez (“Plaintiffs”) oppose the motion for reclassification, thereby opposing the motion for consolidation.
Per Local Rule 3.3, subdivision (g), “Before consolidation of a limited case with an unlimited case, the limited case must be reclassified as an unlimited case and the reclassification fee paid.” (Super. Ct. L.A. County, Local Rules, rule 3.3(g)(3).) In determining whether to classify a limited case as an unlimited case, the Court must “review the record to determine whether a judgment in excess of $25,000 is obtainable.” (Ytuarte v. Superior Court (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 266, 279.)
Here, Defendant has not advanced any evidence from which the Court could determine if Plaintiffs might obtain a judgment in excess of $25,000. Defendant simply argues that the Court should consolidate the actions for purposes of judicial economy since both actions arise from the same motor vehicle accident. However, that is not the standard for determining whether an action should be reclassified as an unlimited civil matter. In the absence of evidence in support of Defendant’s position, the motion is denied.
CONCLUSION AND ORDER
Defendant’s motion for reclassification is denied without prejudice. Therefore, Defendant’s motion for consolidation is denied without prejudice. Defendant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.
DATED: December 10, 2019 ___________________________
Stephen I. Goorvitch
Judge of the Superior Court