Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 19STCV16861, Date: 2022-08-26 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: 19STCV16861    Hearing Date: August 26, 2022    Dept: 28

Defendants Rufino Calles and Carisa Calles’s Motion to Continue Trial

Having considered the moving, opposing and reply papers, the Court rules as follows. 

BACKGROUND

On May 15, 2019, Plaintiff Ana Mendoza-Avalos (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant City of Los Angeles (“City”) for statutory liability pursuant to Government Code §835.

On January 17, 2020, Plaintiff filed the FAC, adding Defendant James H. Shanks (“Shanks”), and causes of action for premises liability and general negligence.

On September 14, 2020, Plaintiff filed the SAC, adding Defendant Richard Otterstrom (“Otterstrom”). Plaintiff later amended the SAC to include Defendants Aram Der Sarkissian (“Sarkissian”), Carisa Calles (“Carisa”), Rufino Calles (“Rufino”) and Ayda Awanessa (“Awanessa”).

On August 19, 2021, the Court dismissed Otterstrom and Shanks, without prejudice, pursuant to Plaintiff’s request. On March 14, 2022, the Court dismissed Sarkissian and Awanessa, without prejudice, pursuant to Plaintiff’s request. On August 15, 2022, the Court dismissed the City, with prejudice, pursuant to Plaintiff’s request.

On November 8, 2021, Carisa and Rufino filed an answer.

On June 20, 2019, the City filed an answer and a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendant Shanks for indemnification, apportionment of fault and declaratory relief. On August 19, 2021, the Court dismissed the Cross-Complaint, with prejudice, pursuant to the City’s request.

On August 4, 2022, Carisa and Rufino (“Moving Defendants”) filed a Motion to Continue Trial to be heard on August 26, 2022. On August 15, 2022, Plaintiff filed an opposition. On August 18, 2022, Moving Defendants filed a reply.

Trial is currently scheduled for September 23, 2022.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Moving Defendants request the Court continue trial to January 25, 2023, and to have all dates trail the new trial date.

Plaintiff requests the Court either grant a trial date of November 2, 2022, or deny the motion.

LEGAL STANDARD

CRC rule 3.1332(b) outlines that “a party seeking a continuance of the date set for trial, whether contested or uncontested or stipulated to by the parties, must make the request for a continuance by a noticed motion or an ex parte application under the rules in chapter 4 of this division, with supporting declarations. The party must make the motion or application as soon as reasonably practical once the necessity for the continuance is discovered.”

Under CRC 3.1332(c), The Court may grant a continuance only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring the continuance. Circumstances that may indicate good cause include “a party's excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts,” or the unavailability of a party, counsel, or expert due to death, illness or other excusable circumstance. The Court should consider all facts and circumstances relevant to the determination, such as proximity of the trial date, prior continuances, prejudice suffered, whether all parties have stipulated to a continuance, and whether the interests of justice are served. CRC 3.1332(d).

DISCUSSION

Parties agreed to continue the hearing to November 2, 2022. The Court is unavailable to set trial on November 2, 2022, but will instead continue trial to November 4, 2022. This continuance is minimal and allows parties adequate time to finish discovery, and thus the Court finds there is good cause to grant the motion.

CONCLUSION

0Defendants Rufino Calles and Carisa Calles’s Motion to Continue Trial is GRANTED. Trial is continued to November 4, 2022, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 28 of the Spring Street Courthouse. The Final Status Conference is October 21, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. in Department 28 of the Spring Street Courthouse. All dates or deadlines are continued to trail the new trial.

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.