Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 22STCV14577, Date: 2023-08-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV14577    Hearing Date: August 23, 2023    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely.  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

TENTATIVE RULING

BACKGROUND

This action arises from a motor vehicle collision that occurred on October 11, 2021. (First Amended Complaint, hereinafter, “FAC”, ¶ 10.) Marcus Webb was driving in a vehicle owned by Herzog, Yuhas, Ehrlich & Ardell, APC(“Plaintiffs”) and filed this action against Daniel Salin (“Defendant”) after a collision took place.    

Defendant has filed a Motion to Continue Trial and All Related Pre-Trial Dates (“Motion”) on June 12, 2023. On August 14, 2023, Defendant filed a Notice of Non-Receipt of Opposition to the Motion. 

DISCUSSION

Legal Standard –

California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (c) states that although disfavored, the trial date may be continued for “good cause,” which includes (without limitation): (1) unavailability of trial counsel or witnesses due to “death, illness, or other excusable circumstances”; (2) the addition of a new party depriving the new party (or other parties) from conducting discovery and preparing for trial; (3) “excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts”; or (4) “[a] significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case” preventing it from being ready for trial.¿ (Id., Rule 3.1332(c).)¿¿¿

The court may also consider the following factors: “(1) The proximity of the trial date; (2) Whether there was any previous continuance, extension of time, or delay of trial due to any party; (3) The length of the continuance requested; (4) The availability of alternative means to address the problem that gave rise to the motion or application for a continuance; (5) The prejudice that parties or witnesses will suffer as a result of the continuance; (6) If the case is entitled to a preferential trial setting, the reasons for that status and whether the need for a continuance outweighs the need to avoid delay; (7) The court's calendar and the impact of granting a continuance on other pending trials; (8) Whether trial counsel is engaged in another trial; (9) Whether all parties have stipulated to a continuance; (10) Whether the interests of justice are best served by a continuance, by the trial of the matter, or by imposing conditions on the continuance; and (11) Any other fact or circumstance relevant to the fair determination of the motion or application.” (Cal. Rules of Court 3.1332(d).)¿¿ ¿

Analysis –

Defendant has demonstrated good cause for a continuance. The current trial date is scheduled for October 30, 2023. However, Defendant contends that there is still discovery that needs to be completed as Defendant has already filed five discovery motions seeking verified responses to written discovery. Significant discovery remains outstanding. The excused inability to obtain essential discovery is good cause for a continuance. Additionally, this is the first continuance requested in the matter, the Court has received no opposition from Plaintiff, and accordingly there appears to be no prejudice to either party by granting a continuance. Therefore, the Court will grant the instant Motion.  

CONCLUSION

Defendant’s Motion to Continue Trial and All Related Pre-Trial Dates is GRANTED.

The Final Status Conference is continued to April 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 32.

Trial is continued to April 30, 2024 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 32.

All discovery and motion deadlines are associated with the new trial date.

No further continuance absent a showing of good cause.

Defendant shall give notice of the Court’s order and file a proof of service of such.