Judge: Kevin C. Brazile, Case: 22STCV16433, Date: 2022-12-09 Tentative Ruling

Hearing Date: December 9, 2022

Case Name: Amaro, et al. v. Hwy 111 Hotel Group, LP, et al.

Case No.: 20STCV10762

Matter: Motion to Continue Trial Date

Moving Party: Defendant Rosecrans Avenue Property, LLC

Responding Party: Unopposed

Notice: OK

Ruling: The Motion is granted.

Moving party to give notice.

If counsel do not submit on the tentative, they are strongly 

encouraged to appear by LACourtConnect rather than in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Defendant Rosecrans Avenue Property, LLC seeks to continue the March 6, 2023, trial date to August 21, 2023, or thereafter.  Defendant also seeks to have all other deadlines tethered to the new trial date.  The basis for this request is that “[t]his matter consists of two consolidated actions and involves approximately one hundred thirty individual plaintiffs. While the parties are diligently engaged in discovery, including written discovery and dozens of depositions conducted over the last several months, scheduling difficulties will prevent the parties from completing all essential discovery and participating in mediation in advance of the March 6, 2023 trial date.”

Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1332 provides, “In ruling on a motion or application for continuance, the court must consider all the facts and circumstances that are relevant to the determination. These may include: (1) The proximity of the trial date; (2) Whether there was any previous continuance, extension of time, or delay of trial due to any party; (3)The length of the continuance requested; (4)The availability of alternative means to address the problem that gave rise to the motion or application for a continuance; (5) The prejudice that parties or witnesses will suffer as a result of the continuance; (6) If the case is entitled to a preferential trial setting, the reasons for that status and whether the need for a continuance outweighs the need to avoid delay; (7) The court's calendar and the impact of granting a continuance on other pending trials; (8) Whether trial counsel is engaged in another trial; (9) Whether all parties have stipulated to a continuance; (10)Whether the interests of justice are best served by a continuance, by the trial of the matter, or by imposing conditions on the continuance; and (11) Any other fact or circumstance relevant to the fair determination of the motion or application.”

As there is no opposition, the Motion is granted.  (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 8.54(c); Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.)  

Moving party to give notice.

If counsel do not submit on the tentative, they are strongly encouraged to appear by LACourtConnect rather than in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic.