Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 19STCV07619, Date: 2022-09-07 Tentative Ruling

All parties are urged to meet and confer with all parties concerning this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreed-upon resolution of their matter.  If you are able to reach an agreement, please notify the courtroom staff in advance of the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative ruling rather than argue the motion by notifying the court by e-mailing the court at: SSCDEPT28@lacourt.org.  Include the word "SUBMITS" in all caps and the Case Number in the Subject line.  In the body of the email, please provide the date and time of the hearing, your name, your contact information, the party you represent, and whether that party is a plaintiff, defendant, cross-complainant, cross-defendant, claimant, intervenor, or non-party, etc.

            Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may still appear at the hearing and argue the matter, and the court could change its tentative based upon the argument.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If you submit, but still intend to appear, include the words "SUBMITS, BUT WILL APPEAR" in the Subject line.     If you elect to argue your matter, you are urged to do so remotely, via Court-Connect.
                          
            Note that once the Court has issued a tentative, the Court has the inherent authority not to allow the withdrawal of a motion and to adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the court.   
 
            If you submitted a courtesy copy of your papers containing media (such as a DVD or thumb drive), unless you request the return of the media in your papers, the court will destroy it following the hearing of your matter.  

Case Number: 19STCV07619    Hearing Date: September 7, 2022    Dept: 28

Plaintiffs Veronica Baiz and Alexandria Baiz’s Motion to Extend Discovery Proceedings

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. 

BACKGROUND

On March 4, 2019, Plaintiff Veronica Baiz (“Veronica”) and Alexandria Biaz (“Alexandria”) filed this action against Defendant Paul Campbell (“Campbell”) for motor vehicle negligence and general negligence.

On May 21, 2020, Plaintiffs submitted the FAC, adding Defendants Estate of Paul Campbell (“Estate”) and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”).

On July 9, 2020, Plaintiffs filed the SAC against only Estate.

On August 7, 2020, the Estate filed its answer.

On August 11, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Reopen Discovery to be heard on September 7, 2022.

Trial is currently scheduled for October 21, 2022.   

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Plaintiffs request the Court extend the discovery cut-off to allow for the deposition of Plaintiff’s expert, and continue trial as needed.

LEGAL STANDARD

CCP § 2024.050 provides: “(a) On motion of any party, the court may grant leave to complete discovery proceedings, or to have a motion concerning discovery heard, closer to the initial trial date, or to reopen discovery after a new trial date has been set. This motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040. (b) In exercising its discretion to grant or deny this motion, the court shall take into consideration any matter relevant to the leave requested, including, but not limited to, the following: (1) The necessity and the reasons for the discovery. (2) The diligence or lack of diligence of the party seeking the discovery or the hearing of a discovery motion, and the reasons that the discovery was not completed or that the discovery motion was not heard earlier. (3) Any likelihood that permitting the discovery or hearing the discovery motion will prevent the case from going to trial on the date set, or otherwise interfere with the trial calendar, or result in prejudice to any other party. (4) The length of time that has elapsed between any date previously set, and the date presently set, for the trial of the action.”

DISCUSSION

Plaintiffs request the Court extend the discovery cut-off to enable the Estate to depose Plaintiff’s expert witness, who will not be available until September 16, 2022. Parties have agreed to the deposition being scheduled for this date and the Court has already granted a brief continuance to facilitate parties finishing discovery. As such, the Court finds good cause to extend discovery.

CONCLUSION

Plaintiffs Veronica Baiz and Alexandria Baiz’s Motion to Extend Discovery Proceedings is GRANTED. Discovery dates are set to track the new trial date of October 21

            Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Moving Party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.

The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.