Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 22STCV37453, Date: 2024-03-26 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV37453 Hearing Date: March 26, 2024 Dept: 28
Having considered the moving, opposing and reply papers, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On November 30, 2022, Plaintiff Agustina Bizarro Garcia (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants City of Los Angeles (“City”), S.B. Community Homes, Inc. dba Kilgore Manor (“Kilgore”), and Does 1-25 for statutory liability/dangerous condition of public property and premises liability.
On January 30, 2023, the City and Kilgore filed answers.
On April 3, 2023, the City filed a cross-complaint against Cross-Defendants Kilgore and Roes 1-10 for indemnification, apportionment of fault, and declaratory relief.
On February 8, 2024, Kilgore filed a motion for summary judgment against Plaintiff, to be heard on May 1, 2024.
On February 21, 2024, Kilgore filed a motion to advance the hearing on its motion for summary judgment or in the alternative to continue the trial. The motion was set to be heard on March 26, 2024. On March 12, 2024, Plaintiff filed an opposition. On March 19, 2024, Kilgore filed a reply.
Trial is currently scheduled for May 29, 2024.
PARTIES’ REQUESTS
Kilgore asks the Court to advance the hearing on its motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, continue the trial.
Plaintiff asks the Court to deny the motion.
LEGAL STANDARD
A. Motion to continue trial
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.)
B. Summary judgment timing
Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (a), provides:
“(a) (1) A party may move for summary judgment in an action or proceeding if it is contended that the action has no merit or that there is no defense to the action or proceeding. The motion may be made at any time after 60 days have elapsed since the general appearance in the action or proceeding of each party against whom the motion is directed or at any earlier time after the general appearance that the court, with or without notice and upon good cause shown, may direct.
“(2) Notice of the motion and supporting papers shall be served on all other parties to the action at least 75 days before the time appointed for hearing. If the notice is served by mail, the required 75-day period of notice shall be increased by 5 days if the place of address is within the State of California, 10 days if the place of address is outside the State of California but within the United States, and 20 days if the place of address is outside the United States. If the notice is served by facsimile transmission, express mail, or another method of delivery providing for overnight delivery, the required 75-day period of notice shall be increased by two court days.
“(3) The motion shall be heard no later than 30 days before the date of trial, unless the court for good cause orders otherwise. The filing of the motion shall not extend the time within which a party must otherwise file a responsive pleading.”
(Code Civ. Proc., § 437c,
subd. (a).)
DISCUSSION
Kilgore filed a timely motion for summary judgment. However, due to the Court’s impacted calendar, the first available date for a hearing was May 1, 2024, which is less than 30 days before the scheduled trial. Kilgore argues the Court should advance the hearing on the summary judgment motion to April 29, 2024 or continue the trial.
Plaintiff opposes the motion, arguing Kilgore has not been diligent and should have moved for summary judgment earlier to avoid the timing problem it now faces.
“A trial court may not refuse to hear a summary judgment motion filed within the time limits of section 437c. [Citation.] Local rules and practices may not be applied so as to prevent the filing and hearing of such a motion. [Citation.].” (Sentry Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 526, 529.)
The Court’s schedule cannot accommodate an earlier date for the summary judgment hearing. Therefore, the Court denies the request to advance the hearing on the summary judgment motion.
Instead, the Court grants Kilgore’s motion to continue the trial to ensure that the Court can hear Kilgore’s timely filed summary judgment motion. The Court continues the trial to June 5, 2024. Discovery and related dates will be based on the June 5, 2024 trial date.
CONCLUSION
The Court GRANTS Defendant S.B. Community Homes, Inc. dba Kilgore Manor’s motion to continue the trial and related dates. The Court continues the trial to June 5, 2024, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 28 of the Spring Street Courthouse. The Final Status Conference is continued to May 22, 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.