Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 19STCV24931, Date: 2022-09-29 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV24931    Hearing Date: September 29, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff Niki Charles Hannis (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Adriana Mejia and Kevin Najera for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident.  Plaintiff has filed an Amendment to Complaint naming Legal Avenue, LLC as Doe 1.  Trial in this action is set for October 18, 2022. 

Defendants Adriana Mejia, Kevin Najera, and Legal Avenue, LLC (collectively, “Defendants”) have filed the instant stipulated motion to continue the current trial date to June 19, 2023. 

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 discovery has not been completed in this matter, including Plaintiff’s deposition.  Defendants assert the parties require additional time to conduct discovery, and that the parties have stipulated to the continuance.  (Mot. Exh. A.)  Furthermore, Defendants request that discovery be reopened pursuant to CCP § 2024.050 for the parties to complete discovery and prepare for trial.  Defendants establish good cause for the stipulated continuance.  Defendants similarly establish sufficient cause to reopen discovery that has closed.  However, given the age of the case, the parties should expect no further continuances and should plan all motion and discovery practice accordingly.

Defendants’ motion to continue trial is granted.  The October 18, 2022 trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The October 4, 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. 

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 29^th day of September 2022