On June 19, 2020, plaintiff Cecilia Medina (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendant City of Los Angeles (“City”) arising from an August 21, 2019 slip and fall.  On May 7, 2021, City filed an answer.  

On November 17, 2021, Plaintiff named Francisco Govea (“Govea”) as Doe 1.  Govea filed an answer on March 2, 2022 and a cross-complaint against City on March 3, 2022.  City then filed a cross-complaint against Govea on March 22, 2022.  

On April 25, 2022, the Court granted Govea’s unopposed motion to continue the trial to allow Govea sufficient time to conduct discovery and file a motion for summary judgment.  The trial was continued from September 28, 2022, to March 28, 2023.  The Final Status Conference was continued from September 14, 2022 to March 14, 2023. 

On December 12, 2022, Govea filed a motion to continue the trial date and all related discovery dates because Govea could not schedule a hearing for his summary judgment motion any earlier than November 22, 2023.  The Court denied Govea’s motion on January 11, 2023 because Govea had yet to file a summary judgment motion. 

On February 10, 2023, Govea filed a motion for summary judgment.  On the same day, Govea filed this unopposed motion seeking a one-year trial continuance and to set all discovery and cutoff dates upon the new trial date.  Trial is currently scheduled for March 28, 2023.   

The motion is unopposed. 

As a threshold matter, the Court notes that the discovery cutoff date was February 27, 2023.¿ Because Govea also seeks to set all discovery and cutoff dates upon the new trial date, the Court considers the instant motion as a motion to continue trial and a motion to reopen discovery.¿ 

California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (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 California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subd. (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.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subd. (d).) 

Except as otherwise provided, any party shall be entitled as a matter of right to complete discovery proceedings on or before the 30th day, and to have motions concerning discovery heard on or before the 15th day, before the date initially set for trial of the action.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.020, subd. (a).)  On motion of any party, the court may grant leave to complete discovery proceedings, or to have a motion concerning discovery heard, closer to the initial trial date, or to reopen discovery after a new trial date has been set.  This motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration demonstrating a good faith effort at informal resolution.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.050, subd. (a).)    

The court shall take into consideration any matter relevant to the leave requested, including, but not limited to: (1) the necessity and the reasons for the discovery, (2) the diligence or lack of diligence of the party seeking the discovery or the hearing of a discovery motion, and the reasons that the discovery was not completed or that the discovery motion was not heard earlier, (3) any likelihood that permitting the discovery or hearing the discovery motion will prevent the case from going to trial on the date set, or otherwise interfere with the trial calendar, or result in prejudice to any other party, and (4) the length of time that has elapsed between any date previously set, and the date presently set, for the trial of the action.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.050, subd. (b).) 

Code of Civil Procedure, section 437c requires a Motion for Summary Judgment be made any time after 60 days have elapsed since the general appearance in the action.¿ The motion shall be heard no later than 30 days before trial, unless the Court, for good cause, orders otherwise.¿ Parties must serve notice of the motion and all supporting papers at least 75 days before the time appointed for hearing.¿ 

Govea argues good cause exists to grant this motion because (1) on September 16, 2022 counsel for Govea reserved the earliest available hearing date for a motion for summary judgment, which is set for October 27, 2023, (2) Govea filed his motion for summary judgment in compliance with the Court’s January 11, 2023 Order, and (3) William Barrett, the handling defense trial attorney who handled Govea’s defense in this matter recently left the law firm.  (Garibyan Decl., ¶¶ 3-8.) 

Contrary to counsel for Govea’s representations, the filings in this matter show at least one other attorney handled Govea’s defense.  (See, e.g., Motion to Continue Trial, filed March 24, 2022; see also Answer to Cross-Complaint, filed May 5, 2022.)  While Govea fails to articulate a basis to reopen discovery, the motion is unopposed.  The Court finds there is good cause to continue the trial to allow Govea’s motion for summary judgment to be heard and to continue all discovery related dates to the new trial date.   

Accordingly, Defendant Francisco Govea’s motion to continue trial and reopen discovery is GRANTED.    

Defendant Francisco Govea’s motion for summary judgment is scheduled for October 27, 2023 at 1:30 PM in Department 27 at Spring Street Courthouse. The Final Status Conference scheduled for March 14, 2023, is CONTINUED to January 3, 2024 at 10:00 AM in Department 27 at Spring Street Courthouse. The Non-Jury Trial scheduled for March 28, 2023 is CONTINUED to January 17, 2024 at 08:30 AM in Department 27 at Spring Street Courthouse. The Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal is CONTINUED to April 17, 2024 at 8:30 AM in Department 27 at Spring Street Courthouse.  All discovery and related dates are continued to the new trial date.   

Moving part to give notice.