Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 22STCV03664, Date: 2024-11-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV03664    Hearing Date: November 7, 2024    Dept: 27

Hon. Lee S. Arian, Dept 27

MOTION FOR TRIAL CONTINUANCE

Hearing Date: 11/7/24 

CASE NO./NAME: 22STCV03664 BRYANT CRUZ vs DEREK ALLEN VOGLER, et al.

Moving Party: Defendant Lyft 

Responding Party: Unopposed

Notice: Sufficient 

Ruling: GRANTED IN PART

Plaintiff filed this case on January 28, 2022, and trial is currently set for December 4, 2024. Defendant Lyft requests a six-month trial continuance on the basis that Lyft has recently changed its attorney. Counsel for Defendant Derek Allen Vogler is scheduled to begin trial in Kern County on December 2, 2024, in Gonzalo Ramirez, et al. v. Grimmway Enterprises, Inc., Case No. BCV-22-100428, which is expected to last seven to ten days. Vogler’s counsel has also issued over 70 subpoenas for records related to police reports, Plaintiff’s medical and billing information, employment history, and other claims, with more than 30 of these subpoenas still outstanding. Additionally, the parties have agreed to participate in mediation on February 19, 2025.

The Court notes that this case is now more than two years old, and discovery and mediation should have been completed by now. The Court is supposed to ensure that 100 percent of civil cases conclude in 2 years. (see CRC 3.714). A change in counsel does not constitute good cause for a continuance, as new counsel assumes all pre-existing deadlines in the case. Thus, the only persuasive good faith basis to continue this case is counsel’s December 2 trial conflict.  The fact that counsel scheduled a mediation AFTER the trial date is a particularly unpersuasive basis for a continuance – the parties have known the trial date for more than a year and, thus, had ample opportunity to schedule a mediation before trial.  Nonetheless, as an accommodation to the parties, the Court will grant a trial continuance to March 24, 2025, at 8:30 a.m.  The FSC shall be continued to March 10, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. Based on the purported need to do further discovery (albeit, it is unclear why that has not been completed in the year that this case has been at issue), the pre-trial dates, including discovery cut-off dates, will follow the new trial date.

The parties should consider the new trial date as firm.

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.