Judge: Mark A. Young, Case: 23SMCV00580, Date: 2025-01-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMCV00580    Hearing Date: January 9, 2025    Dept: M

CASE NAME:           Giat v. Lovallo, et al.

CASE NO.:                23SMCV00580

MOTION:                  Motion to Continue Trial

HEARING DATE:   1/9/2025

Legal Standard

Pursuant to California Rules of Court (CRC), rule 3.1332(a), “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.” Under CRC Rule 3.1332(b), “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 CRC Rule 3.1332(c), “[a]lthough 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 include 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.

            CRC Rule 3.1332(d) sets forth other factors that are relevant in determining whether to grant a continuance.”

Analysis

Defendant Sixt Rent A Car LLC moves to continue the trial and trial-related dates to permit the parties to complete documenting their settlement. Plaintiff does not oppose. Defendant shows good cause for a continuance of the upcoming trial. Defendant represents that the parties settled this action in March 2024. Defendant explains that Plaintiff’s counsel has not yet returned the signed release document, delaying dismissal. Defendant also notes that the parties have conducted little discovery because of the settlement. Since Defendant represents that the action is settled, it would be a waste of time and resources move forward with trial on the current trial date. (Wulterin Decla., ¶ 4.) If Plaintiff seeks to renege on the settlement, then Defendant would be allowed additional time for discovery. (Id.) The court notes no prior trial continuance in this matter.

Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED. The currently set trial for January 13, 2025 is vacated.  The Court sets a trial setting conference on January 30, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. All trial-related dates and deadlines, including the discovery and motion cut-off dates, and expert discovery dates are continued to correspond with the new trial date pursuant to code.