Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 21STCV38247, Date: 2024-04-17 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV38247 Hearing Date: April 17, 2024 Dept: 14
Wage/hour violations.
On October 18, 2021, Plaintiff
filed his Complaint for PAGA Penalties against Defendants Biagi Bros., Inc. and
DOES 1-100.
On December 20, 2021, Defendant
filed its Answer.
On October 3, 2022, this court
ordered the claim split into its “individual” and “representative” components
and compelled the “individual” component to arbitration.
On January 6, 2023, the parties
stipulated to return this case to court.
Bench Trial is currently set for April
29, 2024.
Instant Motion
Plaintiffs
now move this court for an order continuing trial to an unspecified date, with
all discovery deadlines to track the new date.
Decision
The motion is GRANTED. Trial is
continued to October 28, 2024, at 9:00 am. Final Status Conference is continued
to October 16, 2024, at 10:00 am. All counsel and any unrepresented parties are
to be present in person at the Final Status Conference. Discovery deadlines be
calculated based on the new date.
Discussion
California
Rules of Court Rule 3.1332(a) provides that trial dates are to be treated as
firm. However, Rule 3.1332(c) provides that, although continuances are
“disfavored,” requests should be considered on an individual basis. That
subsection also includes a non-exhaustive list of possible grounds for a
continuance.
Plaintiff
bases his motion on the grounds that (1) discovery is still largely unfinished
and (2) his counsel currently is engaged in a month-long trial in El Dorado
County. While remaining silent on counsel’s trial conflict, Defense takes the
position that the failure to complete discovery is a problem of Plaintiff’s own
making.
Untangling
the skein of who exactly is to “blame” for the failure to finish discovery
would not be a productive use of this court’s time. It cannot be disputed that
this case was significantly interrupted midstream by its trip to arbitration
and back. Defense makes no attempt to dispute that much of the discovery common
to cases such as this has not been done. It is no more in Defense’s interest
than Plaintiff’s to go to trial with a half-prepared case.
Then there
is the issue of scheduling conflicts. The court is not going to compel
Plaintiff’s counsel to be in two places at once. And, realistically, the court
is not going to be available to try this case on the date set. There are two
older cases, both of which are jury trials, set on the same date. There are two
more set to proceed in the weeks prior. The odds that the court would get to
this case, at 5th in line, are not good.
Conclusion
Under all
the circumstances, the appropriate result is to continue this case to October,
and peg the discovery deadlines to the new date. However, counsel should be
advised that their case will be three years old in October, and the court will
not be inclined to continue it again.
For the
reasons given above, the motion is GRANTED. Trial is continued to October 28,
2024, at 9:00 am. Final Status Conference is continued to October 16, 2024, at
10:00 am. All counsel and any unrepresented parties are to be present in person
at the Final Status Conference. Discovery deadlines be calculated based on the
new date.