DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
24CV097296·alameda·Civil·Construction Defect
Hearing 3 months agoDENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE

AVALONBAY COMMUNITIES, INC., A MARYLAND CORPORATION, et al. vs FIVE STAR PLASTERING, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, et al.

Motion to Sever

Hearing date
Jun 3, 2026
Department
18
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Parties

PlaintiffAVALONBAY COMMUNITIES, INC.
PlaintiffAVALON PUBLIC MARKET PARCEL C, LLC
PlaintiffAVALON PUBLIC MARKET, L.P.
DefendantFIVE STAR PLASTERING, INC.
DefendantFirst Point, Inc.
DefendantDaniel Velasquez
DefendantColt Builders Corp.
DefendantTrencore, Inc.
DefendantJustin Anthony Leli Erdtsieck
DefendantAllana, Buick, & Bers, Inc.
DefendantU.S. Glass & Aluminum, Inc.

Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 24CV097296: AVALONBAY COMMUNITIES, INC., A MARYLAND CORPORATION, et al. vs FIVE STAR PLASTERING, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, et al. 06/03/2026 Hearing on Motion to Sever filed by AVALONBAY COMMUNITIES, INC., a Maryland corporation (Plaintiff) + CRS# 724957582158 in Department 18 Tentative Ruling - 06/02/2026 Patrick McKinney The Motion to Sever filed by AVALON PUBLIC MARKET PARCEL C, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, AVALONBAY COMMUNITIES, INC., a Maryland corporation, AVALON PUBLIC MARKET, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership on 04/07/2026 is Denied. BACKGROUND

This is a construction defect action arising out of the development of two apartment communities in Emeryville. Rather than contracting with a general contractor, Plaintiffs AvalonBay Communities, Inc., Avalon Public Market Parcel C, LLC, and Avalon Public Market, L.P. contracted directly with various trade contractors, an architect, and an engineer. Plaintiffs assert causes of action against 22 defendants, and 7 cross-complaints have been filed.

As relevant to this motion, Plaintiffs added First Point, Inc. and Daniel Velasquez (First Point Defendants) as defendants on November 21, 2025. In March 2026, Colt Builders Corp., a previously named defendant, filed a cross-complaint against the First Point Defendants. On February 4, 2026, Trencore, Inc. and Justin Anthony Leli Erdtsieck (Trencore Defendants), who had been in default, appeared in the case and filed a cross-complaint, naming Allana, Buick, & Bers, Inc. (ABB) and First Point, Inc. as defendants on April 3, 2026. ABB directly contracted with Plaintiffs on construction of Parcel C; subcontracted with the architect on Parcel D; and has been retained by Plaintiffs as an expert.

A jury trial is currently set for October 26, 2026.

Plaintiffs move for severance of all causes of action against the First Point Defendants and ABB, as well as any parties named in the future, arguing that severance will avoid undue prejudice and delay, simplify the issues, promote judicial efficiency, and facilitate resolution of the case. Trencore and Colt Builders oppose severance, with U.S. Glass & Aluminum, Inc. joining Colt Builder’s opposition.

LEGAL STANDARD

A court has discretion to make pre-trial orders on the sequence of issues for trial “when the convenience of witnesses, the ends of justice, or the economy and efficiency of handling the litigation would be promoted thereby.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 598.) Similarly, a court has discretion to separate issues or causes of action for trial “in furtherance of convenience or to avoid prejudice, or when separate trials will be conducive to expedition and economy.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 1048, subd. (b).)

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 24CV097296: AVALONBAY COMMUNITIES, INC., A MARYLAND CORPORATION, et al. vs FIVE STAR PLASTERING, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, et al. 06/03/2026 Hearing on Motion to Sever filed by AVALONBAY COMMUNITIES, INC., a Maryland corporation (Plaintiff) + CRS# 724957582158 in Department 18 DISCUSSION

The motion is premature. ABB and the First Point Defendants have yet to appear in the case, so the court has no sense of whether they will need additional time for discovery or when they will be ready to participate in a trial. While bifurcation of liability and indemnity issues may be appropriate in construction defect litigation, discovery is ongoing, and it is not clear that any party is ready for trial in October 2026 yet. Plaintiffs’ decision to retain an expert directly involved in construction of the project at issue does not support severance at this time.

ORDER

Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

CONTESTING THE TENTATIVE RULING: If the parties do not contest, the tentative ruling will be adopted. Any party wishing to contest must notify the court by email at Dept18@alameda.courts.ca.gov and notify all opposing counsel or unrepresented parties by 4pm the day before the hearing.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share