Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 19STCV05029, Date: 2023-04-24 Tentative Ruling



Case Number: 19STCV05029    Hearing Date: April 24, 2023    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely (which is highly encouraged).  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

 

TENTATIVE RULING

 

DEPARTMENT

32

HEARING DATE

April 24, 2023

CASE NUMBER

19STCV05029

MOTION

Motion to Continue Trial

MOVING PARTIES

Defendants Patterson Dental Supply, Inc. and Brian James Decker

OPPOSING PARTY

None

 

MOTION

 

Defendants Patterson Dental Supply, Inc. and Brian James Decker (collectively, Defendants) moves to continue the trial, which is currently set for June 20, 2023 to October 3, 2023.  The motion is unopposed.

 

ANALYSIS

 

 “Continuances are granted only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring a continuance.”  (In re Marriage of Falcone & Fyke (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 814, 823.)  A trial court has broad discretion in considering a request for a trial continuance.  (Pham v. Nguyen (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 11, 13-18.)  California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332 sets forth factors for the Court to consider in ruling on a motion to continue trial.  Whether the parties have stipulated to the postponement is a relevant factor for consideration.  (See Code Civ. Proc., § 595.2, but see Lorraine v. McComb (1934) 220 Cal. 753, 756-757 [finding a stipulation to be merely “directory”].)  

 

Here, Defendants seek to continue trial to provide time for the Court to hear and make orders in response to Defendants’ discovery motions, and for Plaintiff to respond to the orders of said motions.  Defendants attest the continuance would further provide them time to review any discovery provided in response to said motions.  Defendants rely on the declaration of Defendants’ counsel, Arielle I. Berne (Counsel).  Counsel avers that Defendants believe this case is ripe for a mediated resolution, should Plaintiff provide the discovery Defendants have requested, and the parties have set mediation for June 12, 2023.  (Declaration of Arielle I. Berne, ¶ 2.)  Counsel further explains on October 7, 2022, this Court ordered Plaintiff to sere verified responses to Defendants’ Supplemental Interrogatories and Supplemental Requests for Production without objections within 30 days of notice of the Court’s orders.  (Declaration of Arielle I. Berne, ¶ 7.)  Counsel states that Defendants did not receive responses to Defendants’ Supplemental Discovery requests until December 23, 2022.  (Declaration of Arielle I. Berne, ¶ 10.)  Counsel further notes that there remain four sets of discovery propounded by Defendants on Plaintiff on May 13, 2022, and July 5, 2022, to which she still has not responded.  (Declaration of Arielle I. Berne, ¶ 12.)  On October 7, 2022, Counsel reserved hearings on motions to compel this remaining discovery on the earliest available hearing date, May 22, 2023.  (Declaration of Arielle I. Berne, ¶ 12.)

 

Therefore, the Court finds Defendants have shown good cause for a trial continuance pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332. 

 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

 

Therefore, the Court grants Defendants’ motion to continue trial and orders as follows:

 

·       The trial date, currently set for June 20, 2023, is continued to October 3, 2023, at 8:30 AM in Department 32.[1]

 

·       The Final Status Conference, currently set for June 5, 2023, is continued to September 19, 2023 at 10:00 AM in Department 32.

 

·       No further continuance of the trial absent sufficient good cause. 

 

Defendants shall provide notice of the Court’s ruling and file a proof of service of such.

 



[1] A continuance or postponement of the trial does not operate to reopen discovery proceedings. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.020, subd. (b); see also Pelton-Shepherd Indus., Inc. v. Delta Packaging Products, Inc. (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 1568, 1575, fn. 10 [“on motion of any party, the court may grant leave to complete discovery proceedings or to reopen discovery after a new trial date has been set”].)  Here, Defendants did not request to continue or reset the discovery and pre-trial motion cut off dates in accordance with a new trial date.  (See Defendants’ Notice of Motion, pp. 1-2.)