Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 21STCV31511, Date: 2024-02-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV31511    Hearing Date: February 27, 2024    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

I.                   Background 

On August 25, 2021, Plaintiff Parres D’Mar Borden initiated a lawsuit against Defendants CBRE, Inc., Justin Persky, and Does 1 through 20. The proof of service for CBRE Inc. was submitted on February 7, 2023, and the proof of service for Justin Persky was filed on May 8, 2023. The Defendant is seeking a five-month continuance of the trial date, currently set for April 17, 2024, to allow additional time for discovery and mediation.

II.        Trial Continuance 

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).) 

Here, although the case was initiated on August 25, 2021, the Defendants were not served until 2023. It is reasonable for the parties to require additional time for discovery and mediation, especially given the recent discovery of the Plaintiff's previous injuries. Further, because this is the parties’ first request for a continuance, the requested continuance is only 5 months and the parties agree to the continuance, the Court finds that there is good cause to grant the continuance.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff's motion to continue the trial is GRANTED. The April 17, 2024, trial date is continued to [new trial date in early August] at 8:30 a.m. in Department 27 of the Spring Street Courthouse. The April, 3, 2024, Final Status Conference is continued to [new Final Status Conference date] at 10:00 a.m. in Department 27. All discovery and expert cutoff dates are continued to reflect the new trial date.

The moving party is ordered to give notice. 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: 

·         Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement. 

·         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.¿ 

Dated this 27^th day of February 2024