On October 16, 2019 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
Aimco Venezia Llc,
Zapata Angel,
and
Rodriguez Jose,
Rodriquez Jose,
The Villar Group Christian,
Villar Christian,
Villar Group,
Zapata Angel,
for civil
in the District Court of Los Angeles County.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Civil Division
West District, Santa Monica Courthouse, Department N
19SMCV01812 February 26, 2021
AIMCO VENEZIA LLC vs ANGEL ZAPATA 9:00 AM
Judge: Honorable Craig D. Karlan CSR: None
Judicial Assistant: S. Hwang ERM: None
Courtroom Assistant: S. Mixon Deputy Sheriff: None
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff(s): Timothy Tanner (Telephonic)
For Defendant(s): September Katje (Telephonic)
NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: Case Management Conference; Hearing on Motion to
Reclassify (Walker Motion)
The matters are called for hearing.
The Court has read and considered all documents filed hereto. Having heard the arguments, the
Court now rules as follows:
*** RULING ***
Actions in which the amount in controversy is $25,000 or less are classified as limited civil
cases. (Code Civ. Proc., § 86, subd. (a)(1).) Code of Civil Procedure section 403.040,
subdivision (a), provides that “[t]he court, on its own motion, may reclassify a case at any time,”
and “[t]he court shall grant the motion and enter an order for reclassification, regardless of any
fault or lack of fault, if the case has been classified in an incorrect jurisdictional classification.”
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 396, subdivision (b), a matter may be transferred
when, during the course of pretrial litigation, it becomes clear that the matter will necessarily
result in a verdict below the superior court jurisdiction amount or above the limited jurisdiction
amount. “In deciding whether a matter should be transferred pursuant to section 396, a trial court
must look beyond the pleadings but not so far as to trespass into the province of the trier of fact.”
(Maldonado v. Superior Court (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 397, 401.) “Section 396 does not permit a
trial judge to determine the merits of a claim because to do so would run the risk of depriving a
plaintiff of the right to a jury trial in the forum of choice.” (Ibid., italics, ellipsis, and brackets
omitted.) Thus, “there must be a high level of certainty that the damage award will not exceed
$25,000.” (Ibid., quotation marks, italics, and brackets omitted.) “Stated another way, the inquiry
is whether damages over $25,000 could be proven or whether such damages could not be
obtained,” or, “more appropriately,” “whether lack of jurisdiction is clear.” (Ibid., quotation
marks, italics, ellipsis, and brackets omitted.) “The court may believe it highly unlikely that
Minute Order Page 1 of 2
Document Filed Date
February 26, 2021
Case Filing Date
October 16, 2019
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Civil Division West District, Santa Monica Courthouse, Department N 19SMCV01812 February 26, 2021 AIMCO VENEZIA LLC vs ANGEL ZAPATA 9:00 AM Judge: Honorable Craig D. Karlan CSR: None Judicial Assistant: S. Hwang ERM: None Courtroom Assistant: S. Mixon Deputy Sheriff: None APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff(s): Timothy Tanner (Telephonic) For Defendant(s): September Katje (Telephonic) NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: Case Management Conference; Hearing on Motion to Reclassify (Walker Motion) The matters are called for hearing. The Court has read and considered all documents filed hereto. Having heard the arguments, the Court now rules as follows: *** RULING *** Actions in which the amount in controversy is $25,000 or less are classified as limited civil cases. (Code Civ. Proc., § 86, subd. (a)(1).) Code of Civil Procedure section 403.040, subdivision (a), provides that “[t]he court, on its own motion, may reclassify a case at any time,” and “[t]he court shall grant the motion and enter an order for reclassification, regardless of any fault or lack of fault, if the case has been classified in an incorrect jurisdictional classification.” Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 396, subdivision (b), a matter may be transferred when, during the course of pretrial litigation, it becomes clear that the matter will necessarily result in a verdict below the superior court jurisdiction amount or above the limited jurisdiction amount. “In deciding whether a matter should be transferred pursuant to section 396, a trial court must look beyond the pleadings but not so far as to trespass into the province of the trier of fact.” (Maldonado v. Superior Court (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 397, 401.) “Section 396 does not permit a trial judge to determine the merits of a claim because to do so would run the risk of depriving a plaintiff of the right to a jury trial in the forum of choice.” (Ibid., italics, ellipsis, and brackets omitted.) Thus, “there must be a high level of certainty that the damage award will not exceed $25,000.” (Ibid., quotation marks, italics, and brackets omitted.) “Stated another way, the inquiry is whether damages over $25,000 could be proven or whether such damages could not be obtained,” or, “more appropriately,” “whether lack of jurisdiction is clear.” (Ibid., quotation marks, italics, ellipsis, and brackets omitted.) “The court may believe it highly unlikely that Minute Order Page 1 of 2