Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 21STCV45712, Date: 2023-08-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV45712    Hearing Date: August 7, 2023    Dept: 14

Instant Motion

            Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Becker General now moves this court for an order continuing the trial date in this action, and in the related case (LASC Case No. 21 STCV 43086), to Spring of 2024.

Decision

            The motion is DENIED as to Case No. 21 STCV 43086. No motion was filed in that case, and the cases are only related, not consolidated.

            The motion is GRANTED, in part as to this case. Trial in this case is CONTINUED to January 22, 2024, at 8:30 am. Final Status Conference is CONTINUED to January 8, 2024, at 10:00 am. All discovery and related deadlines will track the new trial 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.

            The proffered reason for the continuance is that the parties have been engaging with their mediator for almost 10 months, and the mediator has now determined that the case might settle, so long as the parties do not spend any more money on discovery or trial preparation.

            This does not meet any of the listed grounds for a continuance contained in Rule 3.1332(c). A party’s wish to mediate does not “excuse” their failure to take discovery in a case that has been pending for 20 months. Nor does the mediator’s opinion that, after 10 months of work, settlement may be at hand, constitute a “significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case.”

            However, Rule 3.1332(d) asks the court to consider various other factors, including the length of the continuance, the court’s calendar, prejudice to the parties, the existence of a stipulation, and the interests of justice.

            The court has an incredibly busy calendar on September 18, with at least 6 cases set which are older than this one and therefore likely to precede it. The interests of justice are always better served if the parties can settle. The parties have stipulated and there is no apparent prejudice. Therefore, a continuance is appropriate.

            However, the continuance will not be for the full length requested by the parties. By their own account, they have been working on settlement without success for almost a year. While the court encourages settlements, this case is no longer young. The time has come to move on it.

            Therefore, the court will give counsel four more months to settle the case or prepare it for trial. This continuance will place the case almost one month beyond its two-year mark. The court does not anticipate allowing any further continuances unless counsel are actually engaged in trial on the dates set.

Conclusion

            To accommodate the court’s calendar and give the parties one last shot at settlement, the trial will be continued. However, the length of the prior efforts to settle, and the age of this case overall, dictate that the continuance be shorter than requested.

            Therefore, the motion is GRANTED, in part as to this case. Trial in this case is CONTINUED to January 22, 2024, at 8:30 am. Final Status Conference is CONTINUED to January 8, 2024, at 10:00 am. All discovery and related deadlines will track the new trial date.

The motion is DENIED as to Case No. 21 STCV 43086. No motion was filed in that case, and the cases are only related, not consolidated.