Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 22STCV01315, Date: 2023-04-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV01315    Hearing Date: April 13, 2023    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On January 11, 2022, plaintiff Brodie Stephenson, by, Amber Stephenson, as guardian and mother (“Plaintiff”), filed this action against defendant Patricia A. Jacobs (“Jacobs”) and nominal defendant Craig Randell (“Defendant”) arising from a June 10, 2020 car accident that killed Plaintiff’s father Matthew Ryan Randell (“Decedent”).  In the complaint, Plaintiff identifies Craig as a nominal defendant because Craig has asserted claims based on Decedent’s death.  Craig filed a complaint against Jacobs on June 7, 2022.  The cases were consolidated on September 19, 2022.

On January 30, 2023, Plaintiff filed this motion for summary judgment.

On March 29, 2023, Defendant filed an objection to Plaintiff’s motion because the motion did not contain a Separate Statement of Undisputed Facts.

Defendant is correct.  The motion lacks a separate statement, and as such cannot be heard at this time.  “This is the Golden Rule of Summary Adjudication: if it is not set forth in the separate statement, it does not exist.”  (Massingill v. Department of Food and Agriculture (2002) 102 Cal.App.4^th 498, 511, quoting United Church v. Garcin (1991) 231 Cal. App.3d 327, 337 [emphasis in original]; Kim v. Sumitomo Bank (1993) 17 Cal. App.4^th 974, 979 [“Facts not contained in the separate statement [re: summary judgment] do not exist”].)  A party moving for summary judgment or summary adjudication must support the motion with a separate statement that sets forth plainly and concisely all material facts that the moving party contends are undisputed, and each of these material facts must be followed by a reference to the supporting evidence.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subds. (b)(1), (f)(2); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1350, subd. (c).)  “To ensure that the opposing party has notice of the factual issues in dispute and an opportunity to present the evidence needed to defeat the motion, [Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subd. (c)] requires that the parties submit separate statements of undisputed facts.”  (Weiss v. People ex rel Dep’t of Transp. (2020) 9 Cal.5th 840, 864.)  The failure to comply with this requirement of a separate statement may in the court’s discretion constitute a sufficient ground for denying the motion.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (b)(1).)  Here, Plaintiff’s motion does not contain a separate statement or any “affidavits, declarations, admissions, answers to interrogatories, depositions, and matters of which judicial notice shall or may be taken.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (b)(2).) 

Trial is set for July 11, 2023.  Given that the Court’s calendar cannot accommodate a hearing on the motion for summary judgment prior to the current trial date, the Court will hear from counsel regarding a continuance of the trial date and continuance of the hearing on the motion for summary judgment.

Moving party to give notice.

Dated this 13th day of April 2023