Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 21STCV11488, Date: 2024-06-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV11488    Hearing Date: June 12, 2024    Dept: 27

Hon. Lee S. Arian, Dept 27 

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

Hearing Date: 6/12/24¿ 

CASE NO./NAME: 21STCV11488 FREDY MELGAR vs CITY OF LOS ANGELES

Moving Party: Plaintiff

Responding Party: Unopposed

Notice: Sufficient¿ 

Ruling: MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL IS GRANTED. 

Legal Standard 

¿¿¿¿¿¿ 

Although continuances of trials are disfavored, each request for a continuance must be considered on its own merits.  (CRC Rule 3.1332(c).)  The Court may grant a continuance only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring the continuance.  (CRC Rule 3.1332(c).) The Court may look to the following factors in determining whether a trial continuance is warranted: (1) proximity of the trial date; (2) whether there was any previous continuance 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; (5) the prejudice that parties or witnesses will suffer as a result of the continuance; and (6) whether trial counsel is engaged in another trial.  (See generally CRC Rule 3.1332(d)(1)-(11).)  Additional factors for the Court to consider include: a party’s excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts; whether all parties have stipulated to a continuance; and any other fact or circumstance relevant to the fair determination of the motion or application.  (CRC Rule 3.1332(c), (d).) 

On 3/25/21, Plaintiff filed the present premises liability case against City of Los Angeles. The current trial date is 6/13/24. The parties engaged in mediation on May 8, 2024, and determined that additional discovery is necessary to position themselves to resolve this matter. The mediator, John Raleigh, has kept the mediation open, and the parties plan to attempt resolution after the necessary additional discovery is completed. The parties stipulated to continue the trial to October 2024 to conduct limited discovery of Plaintiff's and Defendant’s expert and the PMQ of Defendant City of Los Angeles. In light of the parties’ stipulation and the request for a relatively short 4-month continuance, the Court grants the motion. The new trial date is set for October __, 2024, at 8:30 a.m. The Final Status Conference is continued to October__, 2024, at 10:00 a.m.

However, considering the age of the case, no further continuances will be granted. Furthermore, the motion did not address the various factors to reopen discovery under Code of Civil Procedure section 2024.050(b). Thus, the Court will permit limited fact discovery: only the deposition of Plaintiff and Defendant’s expert and the PMQ of Defendant City of Los Angeles will be allowed.  Expert discovery shall follow the new trial date.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept27@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.  The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.

Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.  You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.

If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.