Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 20STCV22999, Date: 2022-08-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV22999    Hearing Date: August 26, 2022    Dept: 28

Defendant Orna Amir Wolens’s Motion to Continue Trial

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

 

BACKGROUND

On June 27, 2020, Plaintiff Sorab Rojhani (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Orna Amir Wolens (“Defendant”) for negligence.

On July 27, 2020, Defendant filed an answer.

On August 2, 2022, Defendant filed a Motion to Continue Trial to be heard on August 26, 2022. On August 12, 2022, Plaintiff filed an opposition.

Trial is currently scheduled for October 27, 2022.

 

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Defendant requests the Court continue trial to February 27, 2023 and have all related dates trail the new trial date.

Plaintiff requests the Court 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

Defendant states that essential discovery still remains to be completed, including the deposition of key witnesses. Defendant has been attempted to depose the officers who were at the scene of the incident since February 2021 without success. Defendant also wishes to depose Plaintiff’s wife but has yet to receive dates for availability. Parties have mediation scheduled on September 29, 2022, but the exchange of expert information is due on September 6, 2022. Expert discovery may be unnecessary given the scheduled mediation and would be a timely expense should it be unnecessary. Finally, Defendant notes that Plaintiff has not confirmed whether he is pursuing damages for alleged vision issues; should he be, the Defendant will need to set an IME with an ophthalmologist.

Plaintiff states that discovery will be completed prior to the discovery deadline and that Plaintiff has waived any potential vision claim. In addition, Plaintiff is making his wife available for deposition.  The parties have begun coordinating calendars to schedule her deposition for September.

The Court is inclined to agree with Plaintiff. Although the Court understands that Defendant has had trouble setting certain depositions, the Court does not find that Defendant was diligent in their effort to obtain said depositions. For example, Defendant never pursued a Motion to Compel Depositions despite the fact Defendant has been attempting to take this deposition for over a year. Defendant knew when trial was set to occur and could have taken steps to ensure discovery was completed prior to the trial date. Trial is set to occur a month after the mediation date, given parties adequate time to prepare both before and after mediation. As such, the Court denies the motion.

CONCLUSION

Defendant Orna Amir Wolens’s Motion to Continue Trial is DENIED.

 

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.