Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 20STCV49011, Date: 2023-05-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV49011    Hearing Date: May 26, 2023    Dept: 27

Tentative Ruling

Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 27

HEARING DATE:     May 26, 2023                         TRIAL DATE:  August 7, 2023

CASE:                                Behzad Shiralian, et al. v. Kasim Moosai

CASE NO.:                 20STCV49011

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

MOVING PARTY:               Defendant Getaround, Inc.

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.          BACKGROUND

            On December 23, 2020, Plaintiffs, Behzad Shiralian and Leila Hashmatpour, filed this action against Defendant, Kasim Moosani (erroneously sued as “Kasim Moosai”), arising from a November 19, 2019 motor vehicle collision.  Plaintiff designated Kris Arias as Doe 1 on July 20, 2022, and Cristian Mauricio Torresarias as Doe 2 on July 20, 2022.

On March 6, 2023, Plaintiff designated Getaround, Inc. (erroneously sued as “Get Around, Inc.”) as Doe 3. 

Getaround, Inc. (hereinafter, “Defendant”) now moves to continue the trial date for a period of at least 360 days.

The motion is unopposed.

II.        LEGAL STANDARDS

A.    Continue Trial

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).) 

Notwithstanding any other law and unless ordered otherwise by a court or otherwise agreed to by the parties, a continuance or postponement of a trial¿or arbitration¿date extends any deadlines that have not already passed as of March 19, 2020, applicable to discovery, including the exchange of expert witness information, mandatory settlement conferences, and summary judgment motions in the same matter. The deadlines are extended for the same length of time as the continuance or postponement of the trial date.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., § 599.)¿¿

B.     Deadlines for Summary Judgment Motion 

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.

III.      DISCUSSION

Defendant argues good cause exists to continue the trial date because Plaintiff added Defendant to this lawsuit less than a month ago and approximately five months before the current trial date.  As such, Defendant has not conducted discovery and will not be prepared for trial.  Additionally, Defendant reserved the first available hearing date for its motion for summary judgment motion, which is set to be heard October 9, 2024.  (See Declaration of Jake M. Zicarelli.)¿ Trial is scheduled for August 7, 2023.  For these reasons, Defendant seeks a trial continuance of at least 360 days and to set all discovery and motion cut-off dates to the new trial date.  Alternatively, Defendant requests a continuance of 120-150 days if the Court specially sets the hearing for its summary judgment motion.

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds there is good cause for a trial continuance.  As there is no opposition to the request, no prejudice will result from continuing the trial date.  Given the Court’s impacted calendar, the Court cannot advance the hearing for Defendant’s summary judgment motion any earlier than August 15, 2024.  The Court notes that another hearing date for a summary judgment motion is set for August 8, 2024 in this matter.  Accordingly, the Court intends to continue the trial date to accommodate both hearing dates.  Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 599, all discovery and motion cut-off dates are automatically set to the new trial date.

IV.       CONCLUSION 

The motion to continue trial is GRANTED.  Defendant Getaround, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment scheduled for October 9, 2024, is ADVANCED to August 15, 2024.  The Final Status Conference scheduled for July 24, 2023, is CONTINUED to August 30, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 27 of the Spring Street Courthouse, and the Non-Jury Trial scheduled for August 7, 2023 is CONTINUED to September 16, 2024 at 08:30 a.m. in Department 27 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  All discovery cut-off dates, all pretrial deadlines including discovery, expert, and motion cut-off dates are set to the new trial date of September 16, 2024.          

Moving party to give notice. 

Dated:   May 26, 2023                                                ___________________________________

                                                                                    Kerry Bensinger

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

            Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  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 the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.