Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 20STCV00327, Date: 2022-08-30 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV00327    Hearing Date: August 30, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

1. Background

Plaintiffs Edgar Larios (“Larios”) and Shahnazi Faezeh (“Faezeh”) filed this action against Defendants Christian Mendez and Armando Reyes (collectively, “Defendants”) for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident.  Trial is currently set for November 9, 2022.

Defendants now moves to continue the current trial date at least nine months.  No opposition to the motion has been received. 

In addition, Plaintiff Faezeh’s attorney of record moves to be relieved as counsel. 

2. Defendants’ Motion to Continue Trial

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 contend a continuance is necessary because despite their diligent efforts to obtain discovery, including filing multiple discovery motions, Defendants have not been able to obtain essential testimony, documents or other evidence.  Defendants assert they have not received any substantive discovery from Faezeh, and that despite being ordered to appear for his deposition, Larios has still not been deposed.  The motion is unopposed, and Defendants establish good cause for the continuance given they have not been able to obtain relevant evidence and discovery from Plaintiffs. 

Defendants’ motion to continue trial is granted.  The November 9, 2022 trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The October 26, 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 as to this order concerning the trial continuance.

3. Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

Co-Plaintiff Faezeh’s attorney of record, Hesam Yazdanpanah and Law Offices of Hess Panah & Ass. (“Counsel”), moves to be relieved as counsel for Faezeh.  Counsel contends relief is necessary because there has been no commutation with Faezeh, and that she has failed to respond to Counsel’s phone calls and communications.  Counsel has filed proof of service of the moving papers on Faezeh and Defendants.  However, Counsel provides it has served the moving papers on Faezeh at her last known address, but Counsel was unable to confirm Faezeh’s address was current. 

The motion is denied without prejudice because Counsel declares he has not been able to confirm if Faezeh’s address is current in the past thirty days.  If Counsel is unable to serve Faezeh at a confirmed address, Counsel must serve the moving papers on the Clerk of the Court- located at Stanley Mosk Courthouse- pursuant to CCP §1011 and California Rules Court, rule 3.1362(d). 

Moving Counsel 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 30^th day of August 2022