Judge: Jill Feeney, Case: 20STCV33566, Date: 2023-06-29 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV33566    Hearing Date: June 29, 2023    Dept: 78

Defendants’ ex parte application to continue Plaintiff’s motion for summary adjudication is denied.  Aside from arguing that Plaintiffs have not presented themselves for deposition. Defendants make no showing justifying their request.  Defendants do even not cite the relevant statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 437c(h), which provides, “If it appears from the affidavits submitted in opposition to a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication, or both, that facts essential to justify opposition may exist but cannot, for reasons stated, be presented, the court shall deny the motion, order a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained or discovery to be had, or make any other order as may be just.”  A declaration in support of a request for continuance under section 437c, subdivision (h) must show: “(1) the facts to be obtained are essential to opposing the motion; (2) there is reason to believe such facts may exist; and (3) the reasons why additional time is needed to obtain these facts. [Citations.]” (Jade Fashion & Co., Inc. v. Harkham Industries, Inc. (2014) 229 Cal. App. 4th 635, 655-656; Wachs v. Curry (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 616, 623.)  Defendant’s application makes no such showing.