Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 21STCV36877, Date: 2023-01-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV36877    Hearing Date: January 9, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff Beth Blair (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. (“Defendant”) for damages relating to Plaintiff’s slip and fall in Defendant’s store.  Trial is currently set for April 5, 2023. 

Defendant now moves to continue the current trial date for at least nine months to allow Defendant’s motion for summary judgment to be heard prior to trial.  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, Defendant provides that it recently completed Plaintiff’s deposition in October 2022 and obtained additional discovery supporting a motion for summary judgment.  Defendant asserts that when it sought to obtain a hearing date, the first available hearing date was December 13, 2023, more than eight months after the current trial date.  Defendant seeks to continue the trial date to allow its motion for summary judgment to be heard prior to trial, and to allow the parties additional time to complete expert discovery. 

Defendant is correct that a trial court cannot refuse to hear a summary judgment motion filed within the time limits of CCP § 437c.  (Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 918. 919.)  However, to date, Defendant has not filed a motion for summary judgment in this matter.  (Cole v. Superior Court of San Diego County (2022) 2022 WL 17999483 at *2 [“But the fact remains that the motion was timely filed, and calendaring issues are not a basis on which the trial court can refuse to hear a timely filed summary judgment motion, absent an indication that it was defective under section 437c.” (Emphasis Added.)].)  Defendant in its motion asserts that the last day the Court could have heard a summary judgment motion in this matter was December 21, 2022.  (Mot. at p.3:16-17.)  This is incorrect.  The last day that a motion for summary judgment could be heard based on the current trial date is March 6, 2023, with the filing deadline for such a motion being December 21, 2022.  (CCP § 437c(a)(2).) 

Nonetheless, the relevant factors weigh in favor of granting a trial continuance.  Defendant is making this motion almost three months before the current trial date, as opposed to waiting until the eve of trial, and there have been no prior trial continuances.  Further, there are no alternative means identified to address these issues, and as the Standing Order Re: Personal Injury Procedures at the Spring Street Courthouse provides, Defendant properly seeks to continue trial instead of seeking to specially set the hearing date for a motion for summary judgment.  Lastly, the motion to continue the trial date is unopposed, and there is otherwise no prejudice shown to Plaintiff if the trial is continued. 

Given the length of the continuance that will be necessitated, the parties should expect no further continuances.  They must plan their case accordingly. 

Defendant’s motion to continue trial is granted.  The April 5, 2023 trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The March 22, 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. 

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 9^th day of January 2023