Judge: Mark H. Epstein, Case: 24SMCV03356, Date: 2025-05-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24SMCV03356    Hearing Date: May 28, 2025    Dept: I

This is a motion for trial preference in a case filed against a nursing home.  Plaintiff’s counsel contends that plaintiff is 91 (and that is not contested) and that she is unlikely to live more than 90 days.  The motion is opposed.  The court agrees that plaintiff need not submit a doctor’s declaration; the statute expressly allows the lawyer to provide a hearsay declaration.  But there still has to be some basis to believe that if the matter is not brought to trial within 120 days plaintiff will be prejudiced in the way described by the statute.  The court does not see that here.  As such, the motion for mandatory preference must be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.  But that said, the court is well aware that at age 91 there are a myriad of things that can happen, and setting this case out for trial in early 2027—which would be the normal course—is not appropriate.  The court will discuss with the parties setting this case as a priority matter at an early date, which the court believes it has discretion to do under the statute and based on its inherent authority.  Defendant suggests September of this year, which does not seem unreasonable if the court can accommodate it.