This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/22/2021 at 15:14:44 (UTC).

TULIO TOBAR AGUILAR VS BREEANA MONIQUE ALCALA, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 02/13/2020 TULIO TOBAR AGUILAR filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against BREEANA MONIQUE ALCALA. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JAMES E. BLANCARTE. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******1415

  • Filing Date:

    02/13/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

AGUILAR TULIO TOBAR

Defendants

1 TO 30 DOES

SARABIA BENITO RAUL

ALCALA BREEANA MONIQUE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Defendant and Plaintiff Attorneys

DE LA ROSA MARIO M

BOYD KURT

 

Court Documents

Summons - Summons on Complaint

2/13/2020: Summons - Summons on Complaint

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

2/13/2020: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

2/13/2020: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

2/13/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Complaint - Complaint

2/13/2020: Complaint - Complaint

Stipulation and Order (name extension) - Stipulation and Order STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL; [PROPOSED] ORDER

5/28/2021: Stipulation and Order (name extension) - Stipulation and Order STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Answer - Answer

3/12/2021: Answer - Answer

Motion to Consolidate - Motion to Consolidate

8/26/2021: Motion to Consolidate - Motion to Consolidate

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate)

9/22/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate)

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate) of 09/22/2021

9/22/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate) of 09/22/2021

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate)

10/26/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate)

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate) of 10/26/2021

10/26/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate) of 10/26/2021

 

Docket Entries

  • 02/16/2023
  • Hearing02/16/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/23/2022
  • Hearing02/23/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/26/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/26/2021
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate) of 10/26/2021; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/26/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Consolidate scheduled for 10/26/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court on 10/26/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/25/2021
  • DocketDue to Clerical Error, Hearing on Motion to Consolidate scheduled for 10/26/2021 at 02:30 PM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Clerical Error was rescheduled to 10/26/2021 10:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Consolidate scheduled for 10/26/2021 at 02:30 PM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2021
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Consolidate) of 09/22/2021; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2021
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Hearing on Motion to Consolidate scheduled for 09/22/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Held - Continued was rescheduled to 10/26/2021 02:30 PM

    Read MoreRead Less
5 More Docket Entries
  • 05/28/2021
  • DocketPursuant to written stipulation, Non-Jury Trial scheduled for 08/12/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Continued - Stipulation was rescheduled to 02/23/2022 08:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/12/2021
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: Breeana Monique Alcala (Defendant); As to: Tulio Tobar Aguilar (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Tulio Tobar Aguilar (Plaintiff); As to: Breeana Monique Alcala (Defendant); Benito Raul Sarabia (Defendant); Does 1 To 30 (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2020
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Tulio Tobar Aguilar (Plaintiff); As to: Breeana Monique Alcala (Defendant); Benito Raul Sarabia (Defendant); Does 1 To 30 (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Tulio Tobar Aguilar (Plaintiff); As to: Breeana Monique Alcala (Defendant); Benito Raul Sarabia (Defendant); Does 1 To 30 (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 08/12/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 02/16/2023 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 25 Spring Street Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: 20STLC01415 Hearing Date: October 26, 2021 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION\r\nTO CONSOLIDATE ACTIONS FOR ALL PURPOSES

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOVING PARTY: Defendant\r\nBreanna Monique Alcala

\r\n\r\n

RESP. PARTY: None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE

\r\n\r\n

(CCP § 1048; CRC 3.350)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Breanna Monique Alcala’s\r\nMotion to Consolidate Actions for All Purposes is PLACED OFF CALENDAR.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SERVICE: \r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nProof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nCorrect Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\n16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

OPPOSITION: None filed as of October\r\n22, 2021 [ ] Late [X]\r\nNone

\r\n\r\n

REPLY: None filed as\r\nof October 22, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

ANALYSIS:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

I. \r\nBackground\r\n& Discussion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On February 13, 2020, Plaintiff Tulio\r\nTobar Aguilar (“Plaintiff”) filed an action alleging motor vehicle negligence\r\nagainst Defendants Breanna Monique Alcala (“Alcala”) and Benito Raul Sarabia\r\n(“Sarabia”). This action arises out of an alleged motor vehicle accident that\r\noccurred on March 19, 2018 at or near Laurel Canyon Blvd. and Paxton St. (the\r\n“Subject Accident”).

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On March 12, 2021, Defendant Alcala\r\nfiled an Answer.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On March 16, plaintiffs Edith Grijalva\r\nand minor plaintiff Alejandro Isaac Bustos filed a separate action against\r\nDefendants Alcala, Sarabia, and Jaime Serrato (“Serrato”), Grijalva, et al.\r\nv. Alcala, et al., Case No. 20STLC02531 (the “Grijalva Case”). The Grijalva\r\nCase arises from the same Subject Accident as the instant case. (Grijalva Case\r\nCompl., pp. 4-5.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Alcala filed the instant\r\nMotion to Consolidate Actions for All Purposes (the “Motion”) on August 26,\r\n2021. No opposition was filed.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

At the initial September 22 hearing, Defendant\r\nAlcala did not appear. (9/22/21 Minute Order.)

\r\n\r\n

The Court found that Defendant Alcala had not met all\r\nprocedural requirements of California Rules of Court, rule 3.350. (Id.) For\r\nthis reason, the Court continued the hearing, ordered Defendant Alcala to file\r\nsupplemental papers addressing the noted errors, and warned that failure to do\r\nso would result in the Motion being placed off calendar or denied.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

To date, no supplemental papers have\r\nbeen filed. Accordingly, the Motion is PLACED OFF CALENDAR.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

II. \r\nConclusion\r\n& Order

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Breanna Monique Alcala’s Motion to\r\nConsolidate Actions for All Purposes is PLACED OFF CALENDAR.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Moving party is ordered to give\r\nnotice.

'b'

Case Number: 20STLC01415 Hearing Date: September 22, 2021 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION\r\nTO CONSOLIDATE ACTIONS FOR ALL PURPOSES

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOVING PARTY: Defendant\r\nBreanna Monique Alcala

\r\n\r\n

RESP. PARTY: None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE

\r\n\r\n

(CCP § 1048; CRC 3.350)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Breanna Monique Alcala’s\r\nMotion to Consolidate Actions for All Purposes is CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 26, 2021\r\nat 10:30 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least 16\r\ncourt days before the next scheduled hearing, Defendant Alcala must file and\r\nserve supplemental papers addressing the errors noted herein. Failure to do so\r\nwill result in the Motion being placed off calendar or denied.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SERVICE: \r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nProof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nCorrect Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\n16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

OPPOSITION: None filed as of\r\nSeptember 20, 2021 [ ] Late [X]\r\nNone

\r\n\r\n

REPLY: None filed as\r\nof September 20, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

ANALYSIS:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

I. \r\nBackground

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On February 13, 2020, Plaintiff Tulio\r\nTobar Aguilar (“Plaintiff”) filed an action alleging motor vehicle negligence\r\nagainst Defendants Breanna Monique Alcala (“Alcala”) and Benito Raul Sarabia\r\n(“Sarabia”). This action arises out of an alleged motor vehicle accident that\r\noccurred on March 19, 2018 at or near Laurel Canyon Blvd. and Paxton St. (the\r\n“Subject Accident”).

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On March 12, 2021, Defendant Alcala\r\nfiled an Answer.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On March 16, plaintiffs Edith Grijalva\r\nand minor plaintiff Alejandro Isaac Bustos filed a separate action against\r\nDefendants Alcala, Sarabia, and Jaime Serrato (“Serrato”), Grijalva, et al.\r\nv. Alcala, et al., Case No. 20STLC02531 (the “Grijalva Case”). The Grijalva\r\nCase arises from the same Subject Accident as the instant case. (Grijalva Case\r\nCompl., pp. 4-5.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Alcala filed the instant\r\nMotion to Consolidate Actions for All Purposes (the “Motion”) on August 26,\r\n2021. No opposition was filed.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

II. \r\nRequest\r\nfor Judicial Notice

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Alcala requests judicial notice of the Complaints\r\nand of the Answers filed in both this case and the Grijalva Case. (Notice of\r\nMot., pp. 1-2; MP&A, pp. 4-5.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Alcala’s request is\r\nGRANTED. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

III. \r\nLegal\r\nStandard

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

California Rules of Court, rule 3.350, subdivision (a)\r\nstates in relevant part:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

(1) A notice of motion to consolidate must:

\r\n\r\n

(A) List all named parties in each case, the names of\r\nthose who have appeared, and the names of their respective attorneys of record;

\r\n\r\n

(B) Contain the captions of all the cases sought to be\r\nconsolidated, with the lowest-numbered case shown first; and

\r\n\r\n

(C) Be\r\nfiled in each case sought to be consolidated.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

(2) The motion to consolidate:

\r\n\r\n

(A) Is deemed a single motion for the purpose of\r\ndetermining the appropriate filing fee, but memorandums, declarations, and\r\nother supporting papers must be filed only in the lowest-numbered case;

\r\n\r\n

(B) Must be served on all attorneys of record and all\r\nnon-represented parties in all of the cases sought to be consolidated; and

\r\n\r\n

(C) Must\r\nhave a proof of service filed as part of the motion.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.350,\r\nsubd. (a)). Also, the consolidation statute, Code of Civil Procedure section\r\n1048, states in relevant part:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

(a) When actions involving a\r\ncommon question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may order a\r\njoint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions; it\r\nmay order all the actions consolidated and it may make such orders concerning\r\nproceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

(b) The court, in furtherance of\r\nconvenience or to avoid prejudice, or when separate trials will be conducive to\r\nexpedition and economy, may order a separate trial of any cause of action,\r\nincluding a cause of action asserted in a cross-complaint, or of any separate\r\nissue or of any number of causes of action or issues, preserving the right of\r\ntrial by jury required by the Constitution or a statute of this state or of the\r\nUnited States.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

(Code Civ.\r\nProc., § 1048, subd. (a).) The granting or denial of the motion to consolidate\r\nrests in the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be reversed\r\nexcept upon a clear showing of abuse of discretion. (See Fellner v. Steinbaum (1955) 132 Cal.App.2d 509, 511.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

IV. \r\nDiscussion\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Alcala seeks to consolidate this action with the\r\nGrijalva Action. (Mot., p. 1.) Both cases are pending in this Department. Defendant\r\nAlcala argues that both this case and the Grijalva Action arise out of the same\r\nMarch 19, 2018 accident and that both actions involve negligence allegations\r\nagainst at least two common defendants. (Id.) As a result, both cases\r\nwill require testimony from the same witnesses and parties. (Id.) Defendant\r\nAlcala further argues that consolidation will promote judicial economy because\r\na single trial will determine common questions of law and fact and avoid\r\nduplicative or inconsistent rulings. (Id.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Although the Court is inclined to grant the Motion, the\r\nCourt notes that the notice of Motion does not satisfy California Rules of\r\nCourt, rule 3.350, subdivision (a). Specifically, it does not identify all\r\nparties involved in both actions. The notice of motion was also not filed in\r\nthe Grijalva case as required by Rule 3.350, subdivision (a)(3).

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Thus, Defendant Alcala is ordered to correct these procedural\r\nerrors.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

V. \r\nConclusion\r\n& Order

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Breanna Monique Alcala’s Motion to\r\nConsolidate Actions for All Purposes is CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 26, 2021 at 10:30\r\na.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least 16 court days\r\nbefore the next scheduled hearing, Defendant Alcala must file and serve\r\nsupplemental papers addressing the errors noted herein. Failure to do so will\r\nresult in the Motion being placed off calendar or denied.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Moving party is ordered to give\r\nnotice.

'
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer DE LA ROSA MARIO M