Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 20STCV40029, Date: 2022-07-29 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV40029    Hearing Date: July 29, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

            Plaintiff Kevin Guevara Carranza (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Josue Paniagua (“Paniagua”), Isaac Verduzco (“Verduzco”), Ruben Anaya (“Anaya”), Ruben’s Towing Service, J&H Tire, and Does 1 to 25 for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on August 12, 2019.  Plaintiff filed an amendment to complaint substituting in The Estate of Josue Paniagua for Paniagua on January 27, 2021.  Trial is currently set for August 19, 2022. 

            Defendant Verduzco now moves to continue the current trial date and all trial related deadlines to at least April 10, 2023.  Verduzco filed a notice of non-opposition to the motion on July 18, 2022, providing that no opposition to the motion has been served or filed. 

            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; the proximity of the trial date; 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, Verduzco contends there is good cause for the continuance because of a proposed consolidation of this action with related Case No. 21STCV29039.  Verduzco avers these matters are in the process of being consolidated Verduzco asserts the matters were deemed related on March 8, 2022; however, the court notes that no stipulation or motion to consolidate the actions has been filed to date.  Nonetheless, Verduzco argues there is further good cause to continue the trial date because Plaintiff failed to appear for his medical examination that was scheduled for May 16, 2022, and the exam was rescheduled to August 14, 2022, past the discovery cutoff date.  Verduzco avers that Plaintiff’s failure to appear for his exam hinders Verduzco’s ability to prepare for trial, so Verduzco requires additional time to conduct discovery on Plaintiff’s physical condition.  Additionally, Defendant provides all parties have met and conferred and stipulated to the continuance, with the exception of J&H Tire and the plaintiff in the related action. 

            Verduzco establishes good cause to continue the trial date in light of the fact Plaintiff failed to appear for his previously noticed physical examination, and Verduzco requires additional time to complete discovery as a result.  Verduzco similarly establishes sufficient cause to reopen discovery that has closed.  No opposition has been filed contending that there is no need for Plaintiff’s examination and additional discovery or contending that any prejudice will result. 

            The motion to continue trial date, final status conference, and all related deadlines is granted.  The August 19, 2022 trial date is continued to __________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The August 5, 2022 FSC is continued to __________ at 10:00 a.m. in Department 31.  All discovery and expert cut-off dates are continued to reflect the new trial date.

Defendant Verduzco is ordered to give notice.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: 

• The court is not available to hear oral argument on this date.  If the parties do not submit on the tentative and want oral argument, the hearing will have to be continued, and the parties must work with the clerk to find an available date for the continuance.

·       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 29^th day of July 2022