TENTATIVE RULING
Plaintiff Gaura Taneja’s Motion to Consolidate Case Nos. 19SMUD02591 and 20SMCV00126, or in the Alternative Staying Case Nos. 19SMUD02591 Pending the Outcome of Case No. 20SMCV00126 is DENIED, without prejudice.
Plaintiff Gaura Taneja to give notice.
REASONING
The trial court has discretion to consolidate actions involving common questions of law or fact. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a).) The purpose of consolidation is “to promote trial convenience and economy by avoiding duplication of procedure, particularly in the proof of issues common to both actions.” (Estate of Baker (1982) 131 Cal.App.3d 471, 485.)
In deciding whether to consolidate actions, the Court generally considers the following factors: (1) timeliness of the motion, i.e., whether granting consolidation would delay the trial of any of the cases involved; (2) complexity, i.e., whether joining the actions involved would make the trial too confusing or complex for a jury; and (3) prejudice, i.e., w
Hearing Date
August 06, 2020
Type
Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure) (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
TENTATIVE RULING
Plaintiff Gaura Taneja’s Motion to Consolidate Case Nos. 19SMUD02591 and 20SMCV00126, or in the Alternative Staying Case Nos. 19SMUD02591 Pending the Outcome of Case No. 20SMCV00126 is DENIED, without prejudice.
Plaintiff Gaura Taneja to give notice.
REASONING
The trial court has discretion to consolidate actions involving common questions of law or fact. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a).) The purpose of consolidation is “to promote trial convenience and economy by avoiding duplication of procedure, particularly in the proof of issues common to both actions.” (Estate of Baker (1982) 131 Cal.App.3d 471, 485.)
In deciding whether to consolidate actions, the Court generally considers the following factors: (1) timeliness of the motion, i.e., whether granting consolidation would delay the trial of any of the cases involved; (2) complexity, i.e., whether joining the actions involved would make the trial too confusing or complex for a jury; and (3) prejudice, i.e., w