Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 19STCV06673, Date: 2022-10-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV06673    Hearing Date: October 10, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On February 26, 2019, Plaintiffs Gordana Bordighi and Anthony Bordighi (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendants Gene Tran, D.O. and Ghazaleh Erfanzadeh, M.D. (collectively, “Defendants”) for medical malpractice.  Trial is currently set for November 15, 2022.    

Defendants now move to continue the current trial date to March 27, 2023.  Defendants provide the continuance request is pursuant to an agreement between all parties.    

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, Defendants assert that Plaintiff delayed approximately 20 months after filing this action before serving Defendants with the summons and complaint.  Defendants contend that the delay in service has prevented them from completing discovery, including taking the deposition of witnesses.  Defendants assert Plaintiff has also not completed discovery.  Defendants provide the parties agree the continuance is necessary, and that no party will be prejudiced by the continuance.  Defendants aver they will prejudiced if the continuance is denied because they will be unable to have this complex matter evaluated by experts and complete all necessary investigation before trial.  The parties have stipulated to the requested continuance.  (Mot. Exh. D.)  The motion is unopposed, and Defendants establish good cause for the continuance.  However, given the age of the case, the Court will not be inclined to grant further continuances.   

Defendants’ motion to continue trial is granted.  The November 15, 2022 trial date is continued to August 11, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The November 1, 2022 Final Status Conference is continued to July 28, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 31.  All discovery and expert cut-off dates are continued to reflect the new trial date.  Given the age of this case and the length of the continuance, the parties should not expect further continuances.

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 10^th day of October 2022