Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 21STCV43862, Date: 2024-02-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV43862    Hearing Date: February 2, 2024    Dept: 27

Tentative Ruling

Judge Lee Arian, Department 27

HEARING DATE:     February 2, 2024                   TRIAL DATE:  April 18, 2024

CASE:                                Jose Alfredo Sanchez, et al. v. Joseph Guilay Imatong

CASE NO.:                 21STCV43862

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

MOVING PARTY:                   Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc., joined by Defendant Joseph Guilay Imatong

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.          BACKGROUND

            This is an action arising out of a motor vehicle accident. Plaintiffs Jose Alfredo Sanchez and Anareli Lizveth Arriaga filed the complaint on December 1, 2021 against Defendant Joseph Guilay Imatong (“Imatong”) and Does 1-50. On October 11, 2023, Plaintiffs filed an amendment to the complaint designating Doe 1 as Uber Technologies, Inc. (“Uber”).

Uber filed this motion to continue trial for six months on January 8, 2024. Imatong filed a notice of joinder on January 12.

            The motion is unopposed, but Uber declares that Plaintiffs’ counsel refused to agree to another continuance. (Bonoli Decl. ¶8.)

II.           LEGAL STANDARD TO CONTINUE TRIAL

California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (b) outlines that “a party seeking a continuance of the date set for trial, whether contested or uncontested or stipulated to by the parties, must make the request for a continuance by a noticed motion or an ex parte application under the rules in chapter 4 of this division, with supporting declarations.  The party must make the motion or application as soon as reasonably practical once the necessity for the continuance is discovered.” 

Under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subd. (c), the Court may grant a continuance only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring the continuance.  Circumstances that may indicate good cause include “a party’s excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts.”  The Court should consider all facts and circumstances relevant to the determination, such as proximity of the trial date, prior continuances, prejudice suffered, whether all parties have stipulated to a continuance, and whether the interests of justice are served.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subd. (d).) 

III.      DISCUSSION

            Uber argues that good cause exists to continue the trial date because Uber was brought into the case only six months before the current trial date, and as such, requires additional time to conduct discovery. Uber requests a six-month continuance of the trial date, final status conference and related deadlines.

Uber was named as a defendant in this action almost two years after it was filed, and only two months before the initial trial date of December 12, 2023. (Bonoli Decl., ¶3, Exh. B.) Trial was subsequently continued from December 12, 2023 to April 18, 2024 by stipulation of the parties, but before Uber appeared in this matter. Uber argues that it needs additional time to review existing medical records, take depositions and propound additional discovery. (Id., ¶6.) Uber alleges that “if the trial continuance is not granted, it will be unable to marshal any evidence in its defense and will be forced to blindly participate in a trial less than six months after it first appeared in this action.” (Id., ¶10.) Uber also alleges that continuance will give the parties a chance to engage in meaningful settlement discussions. (Mtn., 3:4-7, 7:1-4.)

Imatong joined in this motion because his current counsel, who was substituted on December 20, 2023, needs additional time to review existing discovery, complete additional discovery, retain experts and coordinate trial preparation with co-defense counsel. (Bell Decl., ¶¶2-4.)

            The Court finds good cause exists to continue the trial date and all related dates. As this motion is unopposed, the Court finds no prejudice will result from granting this motion. 

IV.       CONCLUSION 

The unopposed motion to continue trial is GRANTED.  The Final Status Conference scheduled for April, 2024 is CONTINUED to __FATD 10/7/24______ at 10:00 AM in Department 27 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  The Non-Jury Trial scheduled for April 18, 2024 is CONTINUED to ________ at 8:30 AM in Department 27 of the Spring Street Courthouse.  All discovery cut-off dates, all pretrial deadlines including discovery, expert, and motion cut-off dates are aligned with the new trial date.

Moving party to give notice. 

Dated:   February 2, 2024                                                ___________________________________

                                                                                    Lee S. Arian

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

            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 to 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.