Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 20STCV15115, Date: 2023-01-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV15115    Hearing Date: January 4, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Esmerelda Camacho by and through Antonia Miyan (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants City of Los Angeles (“Defendant”) and Julio Quintanilla for damages arising out of a motor vehicle collision.

Defendant filed the instant motion to continue the current trial date of February 6, 2023, to August 1, 2023.  Plaintiff neither stipulated to the continuance nor filed an opposition.

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, Defendant asserts that it served written discovery on Plaintiff on August 29, 2022, with Plaintiff’s responses to the written discovery being due on September 30, 2022.  (Mot. Kahramanian Decl. ¶ 4.)  To date, Plaintiff has not provided responses to the written discovery.  (Mot. Kahramanian Decl. ¶ 4.)  Defendant avers that there is good cause to continue the trial date to allow Defendant to file the necessary motions to compel responses.  Further, Defendant provides it intended to depose Plaintiff after receipt of the written discovery responses but is no longer able to do so due to Plaintiff’s failure to cooperate.  Moreover, Defendant contends it cannot effectively proceed with a medical examination of Plaintiff without the relevant discovery.  Trial is only one month away.  Plaintiff will not be prejudiced if a continuance is granted, but Defendant will be prejudiced if the Court does not grant a continuance.  The motion is unopposed, and while Defendant should have acted more diligently in filing motions to compel, Defendant establishes good cause for the continuance.

Defendant’s motion to continue trial is granted.  The February 6, 2023 trial date is continued to October 3, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The January 23, 2023 Final Status Conference is continued to September 19, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 31.  All discovery and expert cutoff dates are to be based on the new trial date.  The parties should expect no further continuances.  They should plan all discovery and motion practice accordingly. 

Moving party 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 4^th day of January 2022