Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 20STCV36178, Date: 2022-12-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV36178    Hearing Date: December 8, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

JOSEPH L. GILES, Plaintiff, vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT; SERGIO LIBERIO CARRILLO; DOES 1-25, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 20STCV36178 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL Dept. 31 1:30 p.m. December 8, 2022

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Cross-Complainant,

vs.

JOSEPH L. GILES,

Cross-Defendant.

1. Background

This action arises out of an alleged motor vehicle collision. Joseph L. Giles (Plaintiff) filed this action against Los Angeles Unified School District and Sergio Liberio Carrillo (collectively, Defendants) on September 22, 2020, stating one cause of action for motor vehicle negligence.

Plaintiff did not serve Defendants until two years later on approximately January 18, 2022. Defendant Los Angeles Unified School District filed a cross-complaint with its answer on February 16, 2022, stating causes of action for (1) indemnification, (2) apportionment of fault, and (3) declaratory relief.

Plaintiff and Defendants stipulated to continue trial on October 25, 2022, but the Court rejected the stipulation without prejudice. In its rejection, the Court cited the October 10 standing order that requires both good cause and that the proposed trial date to be within 24 months of the filing of the complaint. The standing order also provides “[o]ther requests to continue trial will be granted only upon a showing of good cause by noticed motion.” Defendants filed this motion to continue trial and a proposed order on November 9, 2022. The motion is unopposed.

Trial is currently set for January 25, 2023.

2. Motion to Continue Trial

a. Legal Standard

Rule of Court 3.1332 authorizes a trial continuance on an affirmative showing of good cause. Rule 3.1332(c)(6) states that “[c]ircumstances that may indicate good cause include . . . [a] party's excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent effort. . . .”

Pursuant to rule 3.1332(d), in ruling on an application or motion for continuance, the court must consider “[t]he proximity of the trial date; [w]hether there was any previous continuance, extension of time, or delay of trial due to any party; [t]he length of the continuance requested; . . . [t]he prejudice that parties or witnesses will suffer as a result of the continuance; . . . [w]hether all parties have stipulated to a continuance; [w]hether interests of justice are best served by a continuance; and [a]ny other relevant facts.”

b. Analysis

In this case, there is good cause to grant a continuance. Trial is currently set for January 25, 2023, roughly seven weeks away. Plaintiff delayed for some time in serving the case, and there has been

no previous continuance. The length of the continuance requested is at least six months. (Motion p. 8.) Defendants assert that they will suffer prejudice without a continuance because they have been unable to complete the necessary discovery, including Plaintiff’s deposition and independent medical examination, as the parties had a discovery dispute that slowed the progress of the case once they answered. (Motion p. 7.) The parties have stipulated to continue trial. (Motion, Exh. A.) Balancing these factors, the Court finds that the interests of justice favor granting a continuance.

c. Conclusion

Accordingly, Defendants’ motion to continue trial dates is GRANTED. The January 25, 2023 trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse. The January 11, 2022 Final Status Conference is continued to _______________ at 10:00 a.m. in Department 31. All discovery and expert cutoff dates are to be based on the new trial date, as the parties have stipulated. Given the age of the case, the parties should expect no further continuances and must plan their discovery and motion practice accordingly.

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 8th day of December 2022

Hon. Audra Mori Judge of the Superior Court