Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 20STCV26242, Date: 2023-01-27 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: 20STCV26242 Hearing Date: January 27, 2023 Dept: 28
Defendant Norwalk-La Miranda Unified School District’s Motion to Continue Trial
Having considered the moving, opposing and reply papers, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On July 13, 2020, Plaintiffs Cathy Contreras (“Contreras”) and Aniya Correra (“Correra” or “Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Corvallis Middle School (“Corvallis”), Norwalk-La Miranda Unified School District (“NMUSD”) and Greenfields Outdoor Fitness, Inc. (“GOF”) for general negligence, products liability and premises liability.
On October 27, 2020, GOF filed an answer. On December 4, 2020, the Court dismissed Corvallis, with prejudice, pursuant to Plaintiff’s request.
On December 18, 2020, Plaintiffs filed the FAC. Plaintiff later amended the FAC to include Defendant Environmental Constructions, Inc. (“EC”).
On January 12, 2021, NMUSD filed an answer and a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendant GOF and EC for express indemnity and declaratory relief. On February 17, 2021, GOF filed an answer. On June 23, 2021, EC filed an answer.
On March 25, 2021, Plaintiffs filed the SAC.
On May 28, 2021, Plaintiffs filed the TAC. Plaintiff later amended the complaint to include Defendant T.J. Janca Construction, Inc. (“T.J.”).
On June 29, 2021, GOF filed an answer and a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendants NMUSD and EC for equitable indemnity, contribution and declaratory relief. GOF later amended the CC to include Cross-Defendant T.J. On August 2, 2021, EC filed an answer. On September 22, 2021, NMUSD filed an answer.
On July 2, 2021, NMUSD filed an answer.
On July 13, 2021, EC filed an answer and a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendants GOF, NMUSD and T.J. for indemnification, equitable contribution, apportionment of fault and declaratory relief. On August 6, 2021, GOF filed an answer. T.J. filed an answer on December 23, 2021.
On December 23, 2021, T.J. filed a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendants EC, GOF and NMUSD for equitable indemnity, contribution, apportionment of fault and declaratory relief. On January 11, 2022, GOF filed an answer. On January 24, 2022, EC filed an answer. On January 26, 202, NMUSD filed an answer.
On January 26, 2022, NMUSD filed a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendant T.J. for equitable indemnity, contribution and declaratory relief. On February 28, 2022, T.J. filed an answer.
On December 29, 2022, NMUSD filed a Motion to Continue Trial to be heard on January 27, 2023. On January 12, 2023, Plaintiff filed an opposition. On January 20, 2023, NMUSD filed a reply.
Trial is currently scheduled for March 13, 2023.
PARTY’S REQUESTS
NMUSD requests the Court continue trial five months.
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.” 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
NMUSD requests Court continue the trial date to allow its upcoming Motion for Leave to Amend NMUSD’s Cross-Complaint to be heard prior to trial. NMUSD discovered on November 23, 2022, that EC had a contract with T.J. that gives rise to NMUSD’s express indemnity claims as a third party. NMUSD only discovered this when reviewing served discovery, as NMUSD is not a first party for this contract. NMUSD applied for ex-parte leave within 2 weeks, but the Court denied the ex-parte request and stated NMUSD needed to file a noticed motion. NMUSD’s hearing date was unable to be advanced via ex-parte request due to the Court’s calendar.
Plaintiff argues that NMUSD has had a copy of the subject contract since October 27, 2021, when EC served it as a supplemental discovery response. NMUSD failed to read the contract until approximately one year later, which does not constitute good cause. One of the reasons NMUSD provided for the lack of knowledge was that the contract was in poor condition—the Court is unconvinced by this reason. The contract was legible enough when reviewed in November 2022, despite NMUSD not receiving a higher quality copy. Another reason is that NMUSD is only ever referred to as the ‘Owner’, which is identified as NMUSD in a different portion of the contract. Plaintiff contends this identification is on the first page of said contract. Ex. B. In reviewing the attached exhibit, the Court agrees: NMUSD is clearly listed as the owner.
In NMUSD’s reply, NMUSD argues that Plaintiff’s mere belief that NMUSD had access to this contract for all of litigation is not fact. However, NMUSD never provided a date in which NMUSD received the contract—only the date in which NMUSD discovered the provision. The Court does not find good cause to grant a continuance. Based on the facts and briefs presented, it appears that NMUSD had access to this contract for at least a period of time prior to the discovery of the indemnity clause. NMUSD’s failure to diligently review received discovery does not constitute good cause to continue trial. The Court denies the motion.
CONCLUSION
Defendant Norwalk-La Miranda Unified School District’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.