Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for writ of mandate. Barry W. Plotkin, Judge., No. CIVRS10-11823
Initiative Legal Group APC, Darrel C. Menthe, Gene Williams, and Arnab Banerjee for Petitioner.
No appearance for Respondent.
Arena Hoffman LLP, Michael Hoffman, and Ronald D. Arena for Real Party in Interest.
OPINION
INTRODUCTION
In this matter, we have reviewed the petition, the response filed by real party in interest, and petitioner’s reply. We have determined that resolution of the matter involves the application of settled principles of law, and that issuance of a peremptory writ in the first instance is therefore appropriate. (Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171, 178.)
DISCUSSION
We agree with petitioner that the cases pending in other jurisdictions do not cover all of her claims and that the doctrine of “exclusive concurrent jurisdiction” therefore does not authorize the staying of petitioner’s action. Although it may be true that there is inappropriate “piece-mealing” of the claims, real party in interest is not entirely innocent in this respect.
We also note that although real party in interest argues that the order was a valid exercise of discretion, it presented the matter below as one requiring a stay; the trial court evidently agreed. In any event, the stay would be improper when other methods exist for a more economical and efficient resolution of all claims if in fact class certification is found appropriate in one or more cases. While we will vacate the trial court’s order, nothing in this opinion prevents real party in interest from seeking coordination of all actions under Code of Civil Procedure section 404. (See McGhan Medical Corp. v. Superior Court (1992) 11 Cal.App.4th 804.)
DISPOSITION
Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandate is granted. Let a peremptory writ of mandate issue directing the Superior Court of San Bernardino County to vacate its order staying the within action, and to enter a new order denying real party in interest’s motion for stay.
Petitioner is directed to prepare and have the peremptory writ of mandate issued, copies served, and the original filed with the clerk of this court, together with proof of service on all parties.
Petitioner to recover her costs.
We concur: RAMIREZ P. J., CODRINGTON J.