Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 21STCV41078, Date: 2023-12-27 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV41078 Hearing Date: April 12, 2024 Dept: 28
Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On November 8, 2021, Plaintiff Solei Smith (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Panda Express, Inc. and Does 1-50 for premises liability.
On December 23, 2021, Defendant Panda Restaurant Group, Inc., erroneously sued as Panda Express, Inc. (“Defendant”), filed an answer.
On March 13, 2024, Defendant filed a motion to continue trial, to be heard on April 12, 2024. Plaintiff did not file an opposition.
Trial is currently scheduled for June 14, 2024.
PARTY’S REQUEST
Defendant asks the Court to continue the trial to October 15, 2024 so that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment can be heard before trial.
LEGAL STANDARD
California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332 provides:
“(a) Trial dates are firm
“To ensure the prompt disposition of civil cases, the dates assigned for a trial are firm. All parties and their counsel must regard the date set for trial as certain.
“(b) Motion or application
“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.
“(c) Grounds for continuance
“Although continuances of trials are disfavored, each request for a continuance must be considered on its own merits. The court may grant a continuance only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring the continuance. Circumstances that may indicate good cause include:
“(1) The unavailability of an essential lay or expert witness because of death, illness, or other excusable circumstances;
“(2) The unavailability of a party because of death, illness, or other excusable circumstances;
“(3) The unavailability of trial counsel because of death, illness, or other excusable circumstances;
“(4) The substitution of trial counsel, but only where there is an affirmative showing that the substitution is required in the interests of justice;
“(5) The addition of a new party if:
“(A) The new party has not had a reasonable opportunity to conduct discovery and prepare for trial; or
“(B) The other parties have not had a reasonable opportunity to conduct discovery and prepare for trial in regard to the new party's involvement in the case;
“(6) A party's excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts; or
“(7) A significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for trial.
“(d) Other factors to be considered
“In ruling on a motion or application for continuance, the court must consider all the facts and circumstances that are relevant to the determination. These may include:
“(1) The proximity of the trial date;
“(2) Whether there was any previous continuance, extension of time, or delay 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 or application for a continuance;
“(5) The prejudice that parties or witnesses will suffer as a result of the continuance;
“(6) If the case is entitled to a preferential trial setting, the reasons for that status and whether the need for a continuance outweighs the need to avoid delay;
“(7) The court's calendar and the impact of granting a continuance on other pending trials;
“(8) Whether trial counsel is engaged in another trial;
“(9) Whether all parties have stipulated to a continuance;
“(10) Whether the interests of justice are best served by a continuance, by the trial of the matter, or by imposing conditions on the continuance; and
“(11) Any other fact or circumstance relevant to the fair determination of the motion or application.”
(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332.)
DISCUSSION
Defendant asks the Court to continue the trial to October 15, 2024 because Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is set for hearing on August 30, 2024, after the current June 14, 2024 trial date.
The Court finds good cause and continues the trial to October 2, 2024.
CONCLUSION
The Court GRANTS the motion of Defendant Panda Restaurant Group, Inc., erroneously sued as Panda Express, Inc., to continue the trial. The Court continues the trial to October 2, 2024 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 28 of the Spring Street Courthouse. The Final Status Conference is continued to September 18, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. in Department 28 of the Spring Street Courthouse. All discovery and related dates will be based on the new trial date.
Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.
Moving party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.