Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 19STCV15091, Date: 2023-04-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV15091    Hearing Date: April 18, 2023    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: April 18, 2023

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion to Continue Trial

Moving Party: Defendants Robert T. Lewin, APC and Rodney Theodore Lewin

Responding Party: Plaintiffs Ahmad Keliddari, Rad-Zin Investment, LLC and Cross-Defendant Mina Keliddari

T/R:     DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL IS DENIED.

            DEFENDANTS TO NOTICE.

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at¿SMCdept54@lacourt.org¿with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing.

            The Court considers the moving papers, opposition, and reply.

While trial continuances are generally disfavored, pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1332(c), circumstances that indicate good cause for a continuance include “[a] party's excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts.” (CRC Rule 3.1332(c)(6).) Factors the Court may consider include, “[t]he proximity of the trial date,” “[w]hether there was any previous continuance, extension of time, or delay of trial due to any party,” and “[t]he length of the continuance requested.” (CRC Rule 3.1332(d).) 

Defendants move to continue the trial date in this action from June 5, 2023 to October 16, 2023 on the ground that Defendant Lewin and his trial counsel will not be available on June 5, 2023 due to trials in other actions. Defendants previously moved to continue the trial date via ex parte application on January 18, 2023. The Court denied the application. On February 23, 2023, the Court granted Defendants’ ex parte application to specially set its motion for summary judgment. The Court set the motion for May 12, 2023 and continued trial from May 15, 2023 to June 5, 2023.

Plaintiffs oppose the motion, emphasizing that the Court already has denied the requested relief. Plaintiffs assert Defendants knew of their unavailability at the February 23, 2023 ex parte hearing, but failed to raise it for fear the application would be denied.

The Court declines to continue trial again. The case is four years old, and trial already has been delayed. The Court accommodated Defendants by specially setting Defendants’ summary judgment motion and allowing a trial continuance. It is well past time for this case to be resolved.

Defendants’ motion is DENIED.