Koch-Ash

Koch-Ash v. Superior Court

Good Law
180 Cal. App. 3d 689·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 1540·225 Cal. Rptr. 657
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 1, 1986B018365California3,392 words

Opinion

Opinion

Woods, J.

By petition for mandate civil plaintiffs, whose actions were severed for trial from the consolidated actions of numerous other plaintiffs, seek to prevent the trial court from denying them the preferential trial date conferred by Code of Civil Procedure section 36, subdivisions (a) and (e).

The determinative question presented is whether section 36, subdivision (a), leaves trial courts with discretion to deny preferential trial rights to litigants who qualify under that statute. Here, the trial court claims such discretion to serve judicial economy and to protect defendants from serial trials that might occur if consolidated cases are severed to comply with section 36 preference requirements.

We conclude that section 36, subdivision (a), as construed by this court in Rice v. Superior Court (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 81 [ 185 Cal.Rptr. 853 ], is mandatory and absolute in its application and does not allow a trial court to exercise the inherent or statutory general administrative authority it would otherwise have.

The material facts are simple and not in dispute.

Petitioners are 12 of some 391 plaintiffs in 47 pending consolidated civil actions (the “Big Rock Mesa-Ibarra…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.