Judge: Deirdre Hill, Case: 19TRCV00981, Date: 2023-02-23 Tentative Ruling
ALERT
Due to Coronavirus, please consider appearing by phone for Department M cases.
Department M strongly encourages the use of LA CourtConnect* for ALL hearings, without need for prior approval, unless live testimony by a witness is required.
The contact information for LA CourtConnect* is:
https://lacourt.portalscloud.com/VCourt/
*Parties with a fee waiver on file may be eligible to appear at no/reduced cost
Dept. M issues tentative rulings in many, but not all motion hearings. There is no set time at which tentatives are posted. Please do not call the staff to inquire if a tentative will be posted.
If parties are satisfied with the ruling, parties may submit on the tentative. However, if an opposing party does not submit, they will be permitted to argue. Please check with the other side before calling the courtroom to submit. The staff does not keep track of which parties submitted and which did not, so please do not ask.
If a matter is also a scheduling hearing (CMC, TSC, OSC etc) an appearance is still required even if a party submits on the tentative ruling.
Case Number: 19TRCV00981 Hearing Date: February 23, 2023 Dept: M
|
Superior
Court of Southwest
District Torrance
Dept. M |
|||
|
ALCOTT
ENTERPRISES LLC, |
Plaintiff, |
Case No.: |
19TRCV00981 |
|
vs. |
|
[Tentative]
RULING |
|
|
MARAKATA
LLC, et al., |
Defendants. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hearing
Date: February 23,
2023
Moving Parties: Defendant Marakata, LLC
with joinder by defendants David A. Hartley, and Alex A. Archie
Responding
Party: Plaintiff Alcott Enterprises LLC
Motion
to Continue Trial Date, Final Status Conferences, and All Other Deadlines
Governed by the Current Trial Date
The court considered the moving, opposition,
and reply papers.
RULING
The motion is GRANTED. The FSC is continued to _____________, at
10:00 a.m. The trial is continued to ___________,
at 10:00 a.m. Discovery cut-offs will conform
to the new trial date.
BACKGROUND
On November 1, 2019, Alcott
Enterprises, LLC filed a complaint against Marakata, LLC for (1) breach of
contract, and (2) common count: services rendered.
On October 20, 2020, the court
granted Alcott Enterprises’ motion to deem the truth of the matters in the
request for admissions admitted.
On January 14, 2021, the court
denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
On October 1, 2021, the court
granted plaintiff’s motion to file an amended complaint.
On October 4, 2021, plaintiff filed
a FAC against Marakata, LLC, David A. Hartley, Alex Archie, Marakata Pharma,
LLC, Marakata Organics, LLC, and Marakata-Red Dog Farms LLC.
On December 14, 2021, Marakata LLC,
David A. Hartley, and Alex A. Archie filed an answer to the FAC.
On April 11, 2022, defaults were
entered against the other defendants.
On August 9, 2022, the court granted
plaintiff’s motions to deem requests for admissions admitted against defendants
Hartley and Archie.
On November 21, 2022, defendants
filed substitutions of attorney.
On February 8, 2023, the court
denied defendants’ motion to vacate and set aside order granting motions to
deem request for admissions admitted.
LEGAL AUTHORITY
Pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1332, “(a)
To ensure the prompt disposition of civil cases, the dates assigned for a trial
are firm. All parties and their counsel
must regard the date set for trial as certain.
(b) 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. (c) Although continuances of
trials are disfavored, each request for a continuance must be considered on its
own merits. The court may grant a
continuance only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring the
continuance. . . .”
CRC Rule 3.1332(d) sets forth other
factors that are relevant in determining whether to grant a continuance.
DISCUSSION
Defendant
Marakata, LLC with joinder by individual defendants Hartley and Archie request
that the court continue the April 5, 2023 trial date and the March 29, 2023
Final Status Conference along with the discovery cutoff.
Defendants
argue that good cause exists because defense counsel was recently retained and
substituted into the case on November 21, 2022.
Further, defendants contend, defense counsel is unavailable for trial on
April 5, 2023. Defense counsel Robert
Spitz states in his declaration that he has numerous overlapping deadlines and
hearing dates culminating in three distinct trials in April 2023. Defendants also assert that former counsel
Robert McKernan failed to adequately represent defendant and to participate in
discovery, and thus, defendants are not ready for trial. The trial has not previously been continued.
In
opposition, plaintiff argues that defendant Marakata is a suspended limited
liability company that may not defend itself.
It also contends that it will be prejudiced because it is continuing to
incur attorney’s fees and costs and plaintiff’s attorney is “winding down the litigation
party of his practice and this is the last action he intends to litigate.”
In
reply, defendants reiterate that they have good cause.
The
court finds that as the court previously ruled on February 8, 2023, defendant
Marakata may not defend itself in this action at this time as it is suspended
(see Rev. & Taxation Code §23301).
However, based on the joinder by the individual defendants and defense
counsel’s declaration, the court finds good cause for a trial continuance. The court notes that defendants did not
request a certain amount of time, but the court finds that a continuance of approximately
90 days is reasonable in light of defense counsel recently substituting into
the case in November 2022.
The
motion is GRANTED.
Defendants
are ordered to give notice of the court’s ruling.