Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 19STCV05950, Date: 2022-08-23 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV05950    Hearing Date: August 23, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

            Plaintiff Jacob Reznik, M.D. (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Nathan Rosen, Stephen Rosen, and Kim Rosen (collectively, “Defendants”) for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on June 22, 2017.  Trial is currently set for September 22, 2022. 

            Defendants now move to continue the current trial date to November 2, 2022, or as soon thereafter convenient to the court’s calendar.  No opposition has been received 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; the proximity of the trial date; 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, Defendants assert that Plaintiff’s counsel was unavailable for mediation set for May 17, 2022, due to commencement of trial in another matter.  Defendants provide the parties rescheduled mediation for the earliest available date with the same mediator, which was September 29, 2022.  Defendants state that the parties have engaged in meaningful settlement discussions and desire to have a meaningful mediation prior to trial.  Additionally, Defendants provide all parties have agreed to the trial continuance, and the brief continuance will further allow the parties to complete discovery.  Defendants assert that there have only been two prior trial continuances, that there are no alternative means to address this issue, and that no party will be prejudiced by the continuance.  Defendants have established good cause for a brief trial continuance for the parties to participate in the rescheduled mediation and complete discovery.

            Defendants’ motion to continue trial is unopposed and granted.  The September 22, 2022, trial date is continued to __________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The September 8, 2022, Final Status Conference is continued to __________ at 10:00 a.m. in Department 31.  All discovery and expert cut-off dates are continued to reflect the new trial date.

Defendants are 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 23^rd day of August 2022