Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 22STCV34964, Date: 2025-02-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV34964    Hearing Date: February 6, 2025    Dept: 54

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

 

ODG Builders, Inc.,

 

 

 

 

Plaintiffs,

 

Case No.:

 

 

22STCV34964

 

vs.

 

 

Tentative Ruling

 

 

 

SBBB LLC et al.,

 

 

 

 

Defendants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hearing Date: February 6, 2025

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion to Continue Trial

Moving Party: Plaintiff ODG Builders, Inc.

Responding Party: None

 

T/R:      PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL IS GRANTED. THE COURT VACATES THE FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE AND TRIAL DATES, AND SETS A TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE FOR NOVEMBER 19, 2025 AT 8:30 AM.

 

PLAINTIFF 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. No oppositions have been received.

 

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).)

 

Plaintiff moves to continue trial from February 2025 to at least October 2025. Plaintiff represents that Defendant Toribio Sesar Mota remains in active bankruptcy with the bankruptcy trial set for October 2025. Plaintiff requests that the Court continue trial in this action to a time after the bankruptcy trial so that the trial can address all claims against all Defendants at the same time. Defendants have not opposed this motion.

 

Due to Defendant’s bankruptcy, the Court finds a trial continuance appropriate. Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED.