Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 22STCV10675, Date: 2024-04-03 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV10675 Hearing Date: April 3, 2024 Dept: 27
Complaint Filed: 3/29/22
Trial Date: 9/9/24
Hon. Lee S. Arian
Department 27
Tentative Ruling
Hearing Date: 4/3/2024 at 1:30 p.m.
Case No./Name: 22STCV10675 ANGEL GONZALEZ vs W.E. O’NEIL
CONSTRUCTION
Motion: MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND TRIAL-RELATED
DATES
Moving Party: Defendant Southern California Edison Company
Responding Party: Plaintiff
Notice: Sufficient
![]()
Ruling: MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND TRIAL-RELATED
DATES¿IS GRANTED
Background
On July 15,
2021, Plaintiffs Angel Gonzalez, Hector Lopez, and decedent Rodolfo Escarate
Martinez were involved in an accident while installing rebar at the West Edge
Project in Los Angeles. The rebar contacted Southern California Edison (SCE) owned
power lines, resulting in Martinez's death and electrocuted Gonzalez and Lopez.
All three Plaintiffs filed their respective complaints in 2022 and the lawsuits
were consolidated on September 7, 2023. The original trial date was set for May
3, 2024. The parties filed a stipulation and continued the trial date to
September 9, 2024. Defendant SCE scheduled a summary judgment motion but the
nearest hearing date was February 18, 2025 and now moves the court to set the
motion for summary judgment hearing before August 9, 2024 or continue the trial
date to sometime after April 10, 2025.
Legal Standard¿and Analysis
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).)¿¿A trial court cannot refuse to hear a summary judgment motion filed
within the time limits of California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) § 437c. (Wells
Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 918, 919.)
SCE's motion for summary judgment (MSJ) is set
for hearing on February 18, 2025. The MSJ filed by Defendants W.E. O'Neil
Construction, Largo Concrete, Hines Interests, and Philena Properties is
scheduled for a hearing on March 11, 2025. The current trial date is September
9, 2024. Continuing the trial date so Defendant’s motion for summary judgment
can be heard constitutes good cause. Thus, the Motion to Continue Trial is
GRANTED.
The new trial date is set for April ____,
2025, at 8:30 a.m. and all pretrial dates are continued in accordance
with the new trial date. The Final Status Conference is continued to April __, 2025,
at 10:00 a.m.
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.