Judge: H. Jay Ford, III, Case: 22SMCV00991, Date: 2023-02-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22SMCV00991    Hearing Date: February 9, 2023    Dept: O

  Case Name:  Meraj, et al. v. Hanasab, et al.

SUBJECT:                 MOTION FOR TRIAL PREFERENCE

MOVING PARTY:   Plaintiff Daryoush Meraj, as Trustee of the Meraj Family Trust established August 3, 1990  

RESP. PARTY:         Defendants Ayoub Hanasab and Eghtedar Hanasab, as Co-Trustees of the Hanasab Family Trust

TENTATIVE RULING

            Plaintiff Meraj’s Motion for Trial Preference is DENIED. 

            According to CCP §36(a), “[a] party to a civil action who is over the age of 70 years may petition the court for a preference, which the court shall grant if the court makes all of the following findings:  (1) The party has a substantial interest in the action as a whole.  (2) The health of the party is such that a preference is necessary to prevent prejudicing the party's interest in the litigation.”  See CCP §36(a). 

An attorney declaration for trial preference under CCP §36(a) is sufficient and may be made on information and belief.  See CCP §36.5.  If a motion for trial preference is granted, the court shall set the trial date not more than 120 days from granting of the motion.  See CCP §36(f).

“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the court may in its discretion grant a motion for preference that is supported by a showing that satisfies the court that the interests of justice will be served by granting this preference.” CCP §36(e).

Plaintiff requests trial preference under CCP §36(a) and (e).  Plaintiff fails to demonstrate that his health conditions necessitate trial preference.  Plaintiff testifies to multiple chronic, long-term conditions, e.g. high blood pressure, high cholesterol and gout.  See Dec. of D. Meraj, ¶3.  Plaintiff also testifies that he has undergone prostate surgery and hernia surgery within the last 7 years.  Id. at ¶3.  Plaintiff does not submit any evidence that these conditions will interfere or prevent him from participating in the litigation, unless trial preference is granted.  See e.g. Fox v. Supr. Ct. (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 529, 535 (plaintiff entitled to trial preference under CCP §36(a) where evidence established she suffered from Stage IV lung cancer, severe coronary artery disease, deteriorating mental state and overall deteriorating health that would prevent her from participating in trial if trial preference were not granted). 

Plaintiff’s Motion for Trial Preference is DENIED.