Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 23STCV01948, Date: 2024-06-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV01948    Hearing Date: June 28, 2024    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

On January 30, 2023, Plaintiff Chinenye Prince Ugorji (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Vanessa Boyle, 6218 Compton LLC, and Does 1 to 50 for injuries related to a dog bite.

Plaintiff passed away on October 13, 2023. (Moloney Decl. ¶ 9, Exh. E.)

Defendants Housing Partnership Network, Inc. and 6218 Compton LLC (“Defendants”) now move to either dismiss the Complaint or vacate the current July 15, 2024 final status conference and July 29, 2024 trial date pursuant to the Court’s authority under Code of Civil Procedure section 128.

Plaintiff has filed an opposition asking that the Court vacate the current trial date.

ANALYSIS

A court has the power to provide for the orderly conduct of proceedings before it and to amend or control its process and orders so as to make them conform to law and justice. (Code Civ. Proc. § 128(a)(3), (8).) 

            Defendants contend that on January 12, 2024, Plaintiff’s counsel informed them that Plaintiff had passed away. The Certificate of Death provided to Defendants shows that Plaintiff passed away on October 13, 2023. (Moloney Decl. ¶ 9, Exh. E.) At the time, Plaintiff’s counsel asserted that Plaintiff’s sister would likely be the successor in interest. (Id. ¶ 5.) Defendants have filed the instant motion because Plaintiff’s counsel has not provided any update on the successor in interest, and trial is currently scheduled for July 29, 2024. Defendants provide no other basis for the Court to dismiss the action, other than Code of Civil Procedure section 128, and the argument that no substitution of plaintiff has been made.

            In opposition, Plaintiff requests that the trial date be vacated in order for the intended successor in interest, Plaintiff’s sister, to be appointed. The Court notes that Plaintiff filed a motion to appoint a successor in interest on June 7, 2024, currently set to be heard on July 15, 2024. Defendants have not filed a reply to the instant motion.

Therefore, seeing as a motion to appoint a successor in interest has now been filed, the Court denies the request to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint. However, because the motion to appoint the successor in interest will be heard close to the trial date, the Court continues the trial.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Accordingly, Defendants’ motion is DENIED.

The Final Status Conference is continued from July 15, 2024 to November 5, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 32 of the Spring Street Courthouse.

Trial is continued from July 29, 2024 to November 19, 2024 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 32 of the Spring Street Courthouse.

All discovery deadlines are associated with the new trial date.

To the extent good cause exists to further continue the trial date, the parties shall first meet and confer and attempt to reach a stipulation.

Defendants shall provide notice of the Court’s ruling and file a proof of service of such.