Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 21STCV19016, Date: 2022-08-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV19016    Hearing Date: August 11, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff Zoe Frohna (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Muse School CA, et al. for injuries Plaintiff sustained while a student at defendants’ school.  Trial is currently set for November 17, 2022.    

Plaintiff now moves to continue the current trial date to October 10, 2023.  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, Plaintiff avers a continuance is necessary because written discovery served on MUSE Global, LLC did not result in substantive responses, and Plaintiff has scheduled an Informal Discovery Conference and motion to compel further responses concerning the discovery for October 11 and 27, 2022, respectively.  Plaintiff contends this information is required to determine MUSE’s corporate successor liability.  Moreover, Plaintiff asserts that defendants Rebecca Amis, Jeffrey King, John Juelis, and Dennis Campbell have recently filed their answers, so discovery is only just commencing as to these defendants.  Plaintiff further contends that despite ongoing efforts, Plaintiff has not yet been able to serve defendant Suzy Amis Cameron.  Furthermore, Plaintiff asserts that Plaintiff and MUSE have reserved hearing dates of April 19 and June 9, 2023, for motions for summary judgment to be heard.  Plaintiff attests there have been no prior trial continuances in this matter, and that Plaintiff’s counsel has calendar conflicts for a trial date prior to October 2023.  The motion is unopposed, and Plaintiff establishes good cause for the continuance. 

Plaintiff’s motion to continue trial is unopposed and granted.  The November 17, 2022, trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The November 3, 2022, Final Status Conference 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. 

Plaintiff 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 11^th day of August 2022