Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 19STCV02249, Date: 2022-09-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV02249    Hearing Date: September 15, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On January 23, 2019, Plaintiff Zhirayr Robert Mekikyan (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants City of Los Angeles, et al. alleging causes of action for negligence and premises liability.  Trial is currently set for October 3, 2022.

Plaintiff now moves to continue the current trial date and reopen discovery.  Defendants City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works have filed a notice of non-opposition to the motion.

Although continuances of trials are disfavored, each request for a continuance must be considered on its own merits.  (CRC Rule 3.1332(c).)  The Court may grant a continuance only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring the continuance.  (CRC Rule 3.1332(c).) The Court may look to the following factors in determining whether a trial continuance is warranted:  (1) proximity of the trial date; (2) whether there was any previous continuance 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; (5) the prejudice that parties or witnesses will suffer as a result of the continuance; and (6) whether trial counsel is engaged in another trial.  (See generally, CRC Rule 3.1332(d)(1)-(11).)  Additional factors for the Court to consider include: a party’s excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts; whether all parties have stipulated to a continuance; and any other fact or circumstance relevant to the fair determination of the motion or application.  (CRC Rule 3.1332(c), (d).)

Here, Plaintiff contends there is good cause to continue the trial date because Plaintiff wishes to substitute his current counsel with new counsel and is in the process of substituting his new counsel into the action.  Plaintiff asserts that his new counsel will not have an adequate opportunity to prepare for trial under the current trial date.  Further, Plaintiff asserts he has not been able to complete discovery because of circumstances related to the Covid-19 pandemic, including taking the depositions of defendants’ persons most knowledgeable.  Plaintiff provides that he anticipates being ready for trial by October 3, 2024, and requests the trial be continued to this date.

The motion is unopposed, and Plaintiff establishes good cause for the continuance in light of the fact Plaintiff is substituting new counsel into the matter and discovery has not been completed.  Plaintiff similarly establishes sufficient cause to reopen discovery that has closed.  No opposition has been filed contending that there is no need for additional discovery or contending that any prejudice will result. 

However, given the age of this case, trial will not be continued to October 2024, as the matter will be approximately five years and nine months old at that time.  Further, because of the age of the case, the Court will not be inclined to grant any further continuances.  The parties should plan all discovery and motion practice accordingly.

Plaintiff’s motion to continue trial is granted.  The October 3, 2022 trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The September 19, 2022 Final Status Conference is continued to _______________ at 10:00 a.m. in Department 31.  All discovery and expert cut-off dates are to be based on the new trial date. 

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice. 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

• Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement.
• If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.  The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.  
• Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.  You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.  
• If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave. 

Dated this 15^th day of September 2022