Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 20STCV23160, Date: 2023-01-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV23160    Hearing Date: January 6, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiffs Ernesto Tinoco Morgado and Elda Castillo (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against defendants Charter Communications, Inc., CCO Socal Vehicles, LLC, Jacob Robles, Tanneka Smith, Leon Payne Jr. for damages relating to a motor vehicle vs. motorcycle accident.  Trial is currently set for February 7, 2023. 

On December 7, 2022, Defendants Charter Communications, Inc., CCO Socal Vehicles, LLC, and Jacob Robles (collectively, “Defendants”) filed the instant Motion to Continue Trial by Stipulation Between Parties.  Defendants request the trial date be continued three months to May 8, 2023, or to a date thereafter.   On December 29, Defendants further filed an ex parte application to advance the motion to continue trial.  This ex parte was denied, and it was unnecessary, given the pending motion to continue trial and related deadlines.  It was noted that Defendants repeatedly failed to attach the alleged stipulation to continue trial to their requests to continue trial.  Later that day, Defendants filed the stipulation 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 provide that the parties are actively engaged in discovery, and Plaintiff is scheduled to undergo a mental examination on December 12, 2022.  Plaintiff is then set to have her deposition taken, and set to take Jacob Robles’s deposition, in early January 2023.  Further, Defendants state that the parties require additional time to complete discovery, including expert discovery, due to Plaintiff’s claimed injuries, and because of delays caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.  Lastly, Defendants assert that the parties have agreed to mediate this matter. 

The motion is unopposed, and Defendants establish good cause for the requested brief continuance.  Given that this will be the third trial continuance in this action, the parties must expect no further continuances.  They are on notice that they should plan all discovery and motion practice accordingly.  

Defendants’ motion to continue trial is granted.  The February 7, 2023 trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The January 24, 2023 Final Status Conference is continued to _______________ at 10:00 a.m. in Department 31.  All discovery and expert cutoff dates are continued to reflect 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 6^th day of January 2023