Judge: Christopher K. Lui, Case: 21STCV25482, Date: 2023-05-08 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV25482 Hearing Date: May 8, 2023 Dept: 76
ORDER RE: FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE AND TRIAL READINESS
DOCUMENTS
The
Court has reviewed the file in this case, and makes the following findings and
orders governing the trial.
Local
Rule 3.25(f)(1) provides that “[a]t least five days prior to the final status
conference, counsel must serve and file lists of pre-marked exhibits to be used
at trial (Local Rules 3.151, 3.53, and 3.149), jury instruction requests, trial
witness lists, and a proposed short statement of the case to be read to the
jury panel explaining the case. Failure to exchange and file these items
may result in not being able to call witnesses, present exhibits at trial, or
have a jury trial. If trial does
not commence within 30 days of the set trial date, a party has the right to
request a modification of any final status conference order or any previously
submitted required exchange list.” (emphasis added.)
The
Court’s Final Status Conference order (“FSC order”), which was issued on November
9, 2021 and served on the parties, requires that the parties file a joint
witness list that includes time estimates for direct, cross, and redirect
examination for each witness. This implements
the mandate of Local Rule 3.25(h) that counsel “provide reasonable and accurate
time estimates for trial.” Without an
accurate time estimate, the Court cannot give prospective jurors an accurate
time estimate to assess their availability to serve as jurors. The parties did not file a witness list.
The FSC
order also requires the parties to meet and confer about potential objections
to exhibits, and to state those objections on the exhibit list, in order to
minimize the waste of time during trial to address objections. The parties did not file an exhibit list.
The
FSC order requires the filing of trial briefs identifying legal and factual
issues regarding the trial, so that the Court is able to prepare for trial and assess
the time reasonably necessary to complete the trial. The parties did not file trial briefs.
The
FSC order also directs counsel to prepare jury instructions, a proposed verdict
form, and a proposed short statement of the case to be read to the jury panel. The preparation of proposed jury instructions
and verdict forms in advance of trial reduces the amount of time necessary to
finalize jury documents during trial, allowing the Court to maximize the
efficient use of jurors’ time. The
parties did not file any of these jury documents.
Notably,
the parties did not even file a joint statement of the case to be read to the
jury. The statement of the case to be
read to the jury is a minor part of the trial readiness documents, but it
serves an important secondary purpose:
if the parties cannot cooperate in the preparation of a joint statement,
the Court has reason to worry about counsel’s ability to meet and confer
productively on other aspect of the case.
The
timely preparation of trial documents as called for in the FSC order and Local
Rule 3.25 allows the Court to ensure that trial will proceed expeditiously
without unnecessary mid-trial delays caused by the need to address issues
concerning jury instructions, admissibility of exhibits, or witness issues. Timely preparation of trial documents also
allows the Court to assess the comparative readiness of multiple cases set for
trial on the same day, which is especially important at this time because the
COVID-19 pandemic has caused a substantial backlog of trials in this Department.
The
parties have failed to assist the Court in fulfilling the efficiency goals of Local
Rule 3.25 and the Court’s Final Status Conference Order, because the parties
failed to file a joint witness list, joint exhibit list, and trial briefs, and
jury documents in advance of the final status conference as required by Local
Rule 3.25(f) and the Court’s Final Status Conference Order.
Based
on the parties’ noncompliance with the FSC order, the Court orders that:
1.
The parties may not present any exhibits at trial other
than items subject to judicial notice.
2.
Due to the absence of any time estimate provided by the
parties, each side will be limited to four hours for opening statements,
direct and cross-examination of witnesses, and closing arguments.[1]
[1] The Court finds that the imposition of a time
limit is required in order to ensure diligence, avoid the waste of jurors’
time, and to exercise the Court’s responsibility “to supervise proceedings for
the orderly conduct of the court’s business and to guard against inept
procedures and unnecessary indulgences that tend to delay the conduct of its
proceedings.” (California Crane School, Inc. v. National Com. for
Certification of Crane Operators (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 12, 22.)