Jensen v. The Home Depot, Inc., No. E067002 (D5 May 31, 2018)
Home Depot gets sued by two employees. Their claims are based on similar disability discrimination theories. But it’s clear they don’t arise from the same transaction or occurrence. Home Depot specially demurred under Code of Civil Procedure § 430.10(d) for misjoinder of plaintiffs, which the trial court granted, with leave. Then an amendment that leaves both Plaintiffs in and another demurrer, which Plaintiffs maybe didn’t oppose. And then another demurrer is granted without leave and a dismissal with prejudice is entered. Which seems kind of crazy, as it’s unclear why joining disparate plaintiffs, while inappropriate, means everyone should lose, effectively on the merits. Plaintiffs appeal.
Then one Plaintiff dismisses. That obviates the misjoinder. There is some debate is over whether the Court of Appeal should be a remand so that the now flying-solo plaintiff can just pursue her case alone or whether the appeal should just be dismissed as moot, leaving the judgment intact. The court takes the former approach, which makes sense.
Reversed.
No comments:
Post a Comment