Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 21STCV36199, Date: 2023-05-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV36199    Hearing Date: May 1, 2023    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

I.       INTRODUCTION

On October 1, 2021, plaintiffs Martha Guzman, Rebecca Isabel Guzman, Yasmin Guzman, and Ismael Guzman, individually and as successors-in-interest of Paulino Guzman (“Plaintiffs”) filed this action against defendant Rodrigo Mata (“Defendant”).  In the complaint, Plaintiffs demand a jury trial.  

Plaintiffs posted jury fees on January 11, 2023.

On January 20, 2023, Defendant filed the instant motion for a bench trial because Plaintiffs allegedly waived their right to a jury trial.  The hearing on the motion was calendared for March 13, 2023.

Plaintiffs filed an opposition on March 1, 2023, which was eight (8) court days prior to the hearing.  CCP section 1005 requires oppositions to be filed nine (9) court days before the hearing.  Defendant filed an objection to consideration of Plaintiffs’ opposition because it was not filed timely, or in the alternative, to continue the matter to allow Defendant sufficient time to file a reply.  The Court continued the matter to allow Defendant to file a reply.

On April 20, 2023, Defendant filed a reply.

Trial is scheduled for February 22, 2024.

II.      LEGAL STANDARD  

Under the California constitution, “[t]rial by jury is an inviolate right and shall be secured by all[.]”  Therefore, “[w]here doubt exists concerning the propriety of granting relief from [a jury trial] waiver, this doubt, by reason of the constitutional guarantee of right to jury trial, should be resolved in favor of the party requesting trial by jury.  (Gann v. Williams Brothers Realty, Inc. (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 1698, 1703-1704.)  The court may, in its discretion upon just terms, allow a trial by jury despite the waiver.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 631, subd. (g).)  Where the right to jury is threatened, the crucial focus is whether any prejudice will be suffered by any party or the court if a motion for relief from waiver is granted.  (Tesoro del Valle Master Homeowners Ass’n v. Griffin (2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 619, 638-39 (Tesoro Del Valle).)  “A trial court abuses its discretion as a matter of law when ‘. . . relief has been denied where there has been no prejudice to the other party or to the court from an inadvertent waiver. [Citations.]’” ¿(Wharton v. Superior Court¿(1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 100, 104.)   

III.     DISCUSSION 

Defendant seeks an order declaring that Plaintiffs have waived trial by jury because Plaintiffs failed to timely pay jury fees.  Parties must pay jury fees no later than 365 calendar days after the filing of the initial complaint.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 631, subd. (c)(2).)  Here, Plaintiffs paid jury fees more than a year after filing the Complaint.  Accordingly, Plaintiffs waived their right to a trial by jury.  (See Code Civ. Proc., § 631, subd. (f)(5).) 

However, despite Plaintiffs’ late payment of jury fees, the Court must balance the equites, and “[w]here doubt exists concerning the propriety of granting relief from [a jury trial] waiver, this doubt, by reason of the constitutional guarantee of right to jury trial, should be resolved in favor of the party requesting trial by jury.  (Gann v. Williams Brothers Realty, Inc. (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 1698, 1703-1704.)  At the outset of the case, Plaintiffs indicated a desire for a jury trial on the face of their Complaint.  Plaintiffs posted jury fees which confirms their desire for a jury trial.  Where the right to jury is threatened, the crucial focus is whether any prejudice will be suffered by any party or the court if a motion for relief from waiver is granted.  (Tesoro del Valle, supra, 200 Cal.App.4th at pp. 638-39.)  Here, Defendant fails to demonstrate he will suffer any prejudice.  Indeed, Defendant does not discuss prejudice at all in their moving or reply papers.   

Absent prejudice, Plaintiff is entitled to relief from her jury waiver.     

IV.     CONCLUSION 

The motion is DENIED.  Plaintiffs’ case may be tried before a jury.

Moving party to give notice. 

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 toA 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.

          Dated this 1st day of May 2023