STEVEN GRIFFIN VS STUDIO POINTE APTS INC ET AL

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC584861    Hearing Date: November 06, 2019    Dept: 4B

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO RECLASSIFY

On June 12, 2015, plaintiff Steven Griffin (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendant Studio Pointe Apts, LLC (“Defendant”) for injuries and damages relating to alleged bedbug and cockroach infestations and uninhabitable living conditions of a residential apartment complex. Defendant moves to reclassify this case as a limited civil case.

A motion to reclassify an unlimited civil case as a limited civil case may be granted only if the court determines that the plaintiff’s claim necessarily involves less than $25,000.00—that a greater recovery “could not be obtained” or is “virtually unobtainable.” (Walker v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 257, 269-270.) In ruling on a motion to reclassify, the Court may not properly “trespass into the province of the trier of fact” and in particular, “pain and suffering are not subject to precise measurement by any scale and their translation into money damages is peculiarly the function of the trier of facts.” (Maldonado v. Superior Court (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 397, 401-402 [“The unlikeliness of a judgment in excess of $25,000 is not the test”].) The Court cannot value a plaintiff’s pain and suffering, which would necessitate their translation into money damages, which is the function for the factfinder. (Walker, supra, 53 Cal.3d at p. 26.; Maldonado, supra, 45 Cal.App.4th at p. 401.)

A motion for reclassification must be made within the time allowed for that party to amend the initial pleading or to respond to the initial pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., § 403.040, subd. (a).) If a party files a motion for reclassification after the time for that party to respond to a complaint, the court shall grant the motion and enter an order for reclassification only if both of the following conditions are satisfied: (1) the case is incorrectly classified; (2) the moving party shows good cause for not seeking reclassification earlier. (Code Civ. Proc., § 403.040, subd. (b).)

Defendant contends Plaintiff will not recover damages in excess of $25,000 because Plaintiff served a section 998 offer to compromise in 2016 for $10,000. Defendant argues Plaintiff does not provide evidence of medical special damages or loss of earnings and will not be able to prevail because there are no City or County violation notices.

Plaintiff argues in opposition that the action seeks punitive and emotional distress damages valued above the $25,000 threshold. Plaintiff contends he recently demanded $183,200 at a private mediation, and that his mental and emotional distress continues to the present. Defendant does not address Plaintiff’s mental and emotional distress damages on reply.

Defendant also does not explain why it did not seek reclassification earlier. This case is nearly four and a half years old, with a trial date in two weeks. It is now time for this case to go to trial.

Based on this record, Court cannot find, as a matter of law, that the case will necessarily result in a verdict below $25,000 and that Defendant showed good cause for not seeking reclassification earlier. Accordingly, the motion to transfer the case to limited jurisdiction court is DENIED.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT4B@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.