Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 20STCV23551, Date: 2022-08-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV23551    Hearing Date: August 12, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff Bernice Brown (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants County of Los Angeles and City of Los Angeles alleging causes of action for negligence and premises liability. The complaint alleges Plaintiff tripped and fell on an uneven and broken portion of sidewalk, and that defendants failed to monitor and maintain the sidewalk in a safe and non-dangerous manner.  Plaintiff has filed an Amendment to Complaint naming Kimberly Berry as Doe 1.  Trial is currently set for August 22, 2022. 

Defendant Kimberly Berry “(Defendant”) now moves to continue the current trial date to a date after August 28, 2023, so that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, which is currently set for July 28, 2023, can be heard prior to trial.  The court has not received any opposition to the motion.

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 July 28, 2023, was the earliest available date for her motion for summary judgment to be heard.  Defendant avers that she cannot have her motion for summary judgment heard prior to the current trial date, and that she will be prejudiced and suffer irreparable harm if the motion is not heard before trial.

The court is guided by the case of Wells Fargo Bank v. Superior Court.  The Court therein held that a trial court may not refuse to hear a summary judgment motion filed within the time limits of section 437c.  (Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 918. 919.)  Local rules and practices may not be applied so as to prevent the filing and hearing of such a motion. (Id.; Sentry Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 526, 529.)  “We are sympathetic to the problems the trial courts experience in calendaring and hearing the many motions for summary judgment.  However, the solution to these problems cannot rest in a refusal to hear timely motions.”  (Id., at p. 530.)

In this case, Defendant’s inability to have the motion heard is due to the court’s calendar.  Therefore, there is good cause to continue the trial date.  Moreover, as the Standing Order Re: Personal Injury Procedures at the Spring Street Courthouse provides, Defendant properly seeks to continue trial instead of seeking to specially set the hearing date for the motion for summary judgment.   

Defendant’s motion to continue trial is unopposed and granted.  The August 22, 2022, trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The Final Status Conference is set for _______________ at 10:00 a.m. in Department 31.  All discovery and expert cut-off dates are continued to reflect the new trial date. 

Moving Defendant 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 August 2022