Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 21STCV40500, Date: 2022-12-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV40500    Hearing Date: December 15, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff Jeffrey Kiyoshi Sato (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants State of California, County of Los Angeles, and City of Long Beach for injuries Plaintiff sustained when he allegedly encountered a dangerous condition while riding a motorcycle.  Trial is currently set for May 3, 2023. 

Defendant The People of the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation, (“Defendant”) now moves to continue the current trial date to at least 30 days after October 20, 2023.  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 avers a continuance is necessary because Defendant asserts that it attempted to reserve a motion for summary judgment hearing on September 13, 2022, and the first available hearing date was September 8, 2023.  Because of a conflict with this date, Defendant’s counsel reserved the next available hearing date, which was October 20, 2023.  Defendant, thus, moves for an ordering continue the current trial date and all trial related dates.  Alternatively, Defendant requests that its motion for summary judgment be specially set for hearing.  The motion is unopposed. 

As to the request to specially set the hearing date, as the Standing Order Re: Personal Injury Procedures at the Spring Street Courthouse provides, the Personal Injury courts do not have the capacity to add hearings to their fully booked motion calendars.  The proper relief to seek is to continue trial instead of seeking to advance or shorten the hearing time.  The request to specially set the hearing date is denied. 

            However, in weighing the relevant factors for determining whether the trial date should be continued, there is good cause for a continuance.  Defendant is making this motion more than five months before trial, as opposed to waiting to the eve of trial, and there have been no prior trial continuances in this matter.  Further, there are no alternative means available through which Defendant’s summary judgment can be set for hearing for before the current trial date, and no party identifies any prejudice as a result of the continuance.

Defendant’s motion to continue trial is granted.  The May 3, 2023 trial date is continued to ______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The April 19, 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. 

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 15^th day of December 2022