Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 20STCV05895, Date: 2022-09-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV05895    Hearing Date: September 14, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiffs Kari Hopson-Moten (“Hopson-Moten”) and Melissa Hernandez (“Hernandez”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendants Maria Palian and Ambartsoum Palina (collectively, “Defendants”) for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident.  Trial is currently set for October 10, 2022.   

Plaintiffs now move to continue the current trial date to March 10, 2023.  No opposition to the motion has been received.   

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, Plaintiffs assert that Hopson-Moten has settled her claims with Defendants and will be dismissing her case, but Hernandez is still undergoing treatment for her injuries sustained in the accident.  Plaintiffs contend that Hernandez is still exploring the full extent and nature of her injuries.  Plaintiffs argue the parties will be prejudiced if the trial date is not continued because Plaintiffs and Defendants will be precluded from obtaining relevant information concerning Hernandez’s treatment before trial, and thus, the parties will not be adequately prepared for trial. The motion is unopposed, and Plaintiffs establish good cause for the continuance. 

Plaintiffs’ motion to continue trial is granted.  The October 10, 2022 trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The September 27, 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. 

Plaintiffs 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 14^th day of September 2022