Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 21STCV30172, Date: 2022-10-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV30172    Hearing Date: October 28, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff Phoebe Malonzo (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Peach Tree Apartments, Hunt Enterprises Inc., (“Hunt”) and Does 1 through 50 for damages relating to a slip and fall at an apartment complex.  Trial is currently set for February 14, 2023. 

Defendant now moves to continue the current trial date for six months or a date convenient for the Court’s calendar.  No opposition to the motion 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, Hunt asserts that Plaintiff has named three Doe defendants in this matter, but two of the Doe defendants were not served until September 21, 2022, and the third remains unserved.  Hunt provides that Plaintiff has insisted that her deposition not be taken until all defendants have appeared in this case, which has not yet occurred.  Hunt contends the continuance is required to allow the case to be at issue, to allow the parties to conduct discovery, including Plaintiff’s deposition and medical examination, and for there to be sufficient time for the parties to file any necessary motions.  Hunt argues that if the trial date is not continued, Hunt will suffer irreparable harm because it will be precluded from preparing an adequate defense.  Hunt further provides that there have been no prior trial continuances in this matter, and it contends there are no alternative means to address these issues.    

The motion is unopposed, and Hunt establishes good cause for the continuance. 

Defendant Hunt’s motion to continue trial is granted.  The February 14, 2023 trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The January 30, 2023 Final Status Conference is continued to _______________ at 10:00 a.m. in Department 31.  All discovery and expert cutoff dates are continued to reflect the new trial date. 

The Court further sets an OSC re: Plaintiff’s Failure to File of Proofs of Service of Summons for 8:30 a.m. on January ___, 2023, in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.

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 28^th day of October 2022