Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 21STCV29266, Date: 2023-01-17 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV29266    Hearing Date: January 17, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff Christine Barnes (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants City of Manhattan Beach, Daniel Canizales, Cody Decesare, and John Doe for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident.  Trial is currently set for February 6, 2023. 

Defendants City of Manhattan Beach, Daniel Canizales, and Cody Decesare (collectively, “Defendants”) now move to continue the current trial date June 2023.  No opposition has been received.   

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 they seek the continuance to complete discovery, including taking the depositions of multiple third-party witnesses and obtaining a medical examination of Plaintiff.  Defendants state that to date, Plaintiff has not provided available dates for a medical exam despite their attempts to obtain such.  Defendants aver that there are no other means to address these issues.  Defendants provide that this is the first trial continuance requested in this action.  Defendants contend that the continuance will serve the interests of justice by allowing Defendants to properly evaluate Plaintiff’s injuries and allowing the parties to attempt to informally resolve this matter.  The Court notes that Defendants have not filed a motion to compel or explained in detail why they have been unable to depose third-party witnesses.  However, the motion is unopposed, and this is a first request for continuance; Defendants establish sufficient good cause for the continuance. 

Defendants’ motion to continue trial is granted.  The February 6, 2023 trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The January 23, 2023 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.  However, Defendants are put on notice that they must act diligently in pursuing the discovery identified here.  If they seek further continuance of this trial, they are ordered to report in detail on what steps they have taken to pursue this discovery.

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 17^th day of January 2023