Case Number: TC028969 Hearing Date: February 20, 2018 Dept: A

# 8. Jeweline Lyles v. World Savings Bank, FSB, et al.

Case No.: TC028969

Matter on calendar for: Hearing on an unopposed motion for consolidation of actions and for the stay of the unlawful detainer action

Tentative ruling:

In this action for quiet title and other causes of action, self-represented Plaintiff moves to consolidate this November 16, 2017 case with an October 29, 2017 Unlawful Detainer filed case against her.

The Court denies the motion because:

· Although Plaintiff declares under penalty of perjury that named Defendant Breckenridge Property Fund, LLC has been served with the Summons and Complaint, the Court file does not reflect this.

· Plaintiff failed to serve this motion on named Defendant World Savings Bank, FSB. (See January 29, 2018 Proof of Service.)

· Plaintiff failed to serve her attached declaration on any party. (Id.)

· The Court may order consolidation when actions involve a “common question of law or fact” under CCP § 1048(a). Plaintiff fails to establish that the two actions involve any common question of law or fact. She merely states that “[these two cases involve all of the same parties, and all Defendants (in the unlimited action) have yet to appear…” (Motion, 2:11-14.)

· An Unlawful Detainer action is a summary proceeding. Plaintiff has failed to cite to any authority empowering the Court to stay an Unlawful Detainer action pending resolution of a consolidated case. Mobile Oil v. Superior Court (1978) 79 Cal.App.3d 486, 490 held that a trial court order staying an unlawful detainer action “constituted an abuse of discretion by the trial court in that it destroys the statutory summary procedure accorded unlawful detainer actions.” The Mobil Oil court emphasized the “unqualified preference in trial setting” in accordance with the “general statutory plan to provide for speedy disposition of unlawful detainer actions.” (Mobil Oil, 79 Cal.App.3d at 495; see also CCP § 1179a (“In all proceedings brought to recover the possession of real property pursuant to the provisions of this chapter all courts, wherein such actions are or may hereafter be pending, shall give such actions precedence over all other civil actions therein, except actions to which special precedence is given by law, in the matter of the setting the same for hearing or trial, and in hearing the same, to the end that all such actions shall be quickly heard and determined”) see also CCP § 1170.5 (“The [unlawful detainer] proceeding shall be held not later than the 20th day following the date that the request to set the time of trial is made…”) (emphasis added).)

· Plaintiff has also failed to comply with the procedural requirements of CRC, Rule 3.350.