Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 20STCV09367, Date: 2022-09-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV09367    Hearing Date: September 12, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiffs Maria Lopez and Johnathan Velasquez (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendant Raymond Woody for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident.  On September 3, 2021, this matter was called for trial, but after there were no appearances by or for either side, Plaintiffs’ complaint was dismissed without prejudice. 

Plaintiff then filed a motion to set aside dismissal that was set for hearing on May 13, 2022.  However, the parties did not stipulate to the matter being heard by Commissioner Bruguera, who was then presiding in this Department, so the matter was continued to May 24, 2022, to be heard in Department 27 at the Spring Street Courthouse.  (Min. Order, May 13, 2022.)  At the May 24, 2022 hearing, with Judge Crowfoot presiding, the motion to set aside dismissal was denied.  (Min. Order, May 24, 2022.) 

Plaintiff then filed the instant motion for reconsideration of the order denying the motion to set aside dismissal, which was set for hearing in Department 27.  At the conclusion of the initial hearing on this matter, and pursuant to the request of Plaintiff, the hearing on the motion for reconsideration was continued to September 12, 2022 in this Department.  (Min. Order, Aug. 2, 2022.)

CCP § 1008(a) provides:

When an application for an order has been made to a judge, or to a court, and refused in whole or in part, or granted, or granted conditionally, or on terms, any party affected by the order may, within 10 days after service upon the party of written notice of entry of the order and based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law, make application to the same judge or court that made the order, to reconsider the matter and modify, amend, or revoke the prior order. The party making the application shall state by affidavit what application was made before, when and to what judge, what order or decisions were made, and what new or different facts, circumstances, or law are claimed to be shown.

“[W]here the judge who made the initial ruling is unavailable to reconsider the motion, a different judge may entertain the reconsideration motion.”  (In re Marriage of Furie (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 816, 830-31 [internal quotations omitted].)  However, “Transfer to another department of the same superior court does not render a judge “unavailable” for purposes of Code of Civil Procedure section 1008. (See Oliverez, supra, 238 Cal.App.4th at p. 1249, fn. 4, 190 Cal.Rptr.3d 436.)”  (Id.)  “The proper procedure upon a motion for reconsideration or a renewed motion is for the second judge to direct the moving party to the judge who ruled on the first motion.  If the original judge is unavailable…the second judge may hear the reconsideration motion.”  (Ziller Electronics Lab Gmbh. v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 1222, 1232.)

In this case, the motion for reconsideration relates to the May 24, 2022 order issued by Judge Crowfoot.  Therefore, the motion for reconsideration is rescheduled for hearing in Department 27 at the Spring Street Courthouse for ______________________. 

Plaintiff 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 12^th day of September 2022