Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 19STCV26050, Date: 2023-04-05 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 19STCV26050 Hearing Date: April 5, 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
5, 2023 |
CASE NUMBER |
19STCV26050 |
MOTION |
Motion
to Continue Trial |
MOVING PARTIES |
Intervenor
North American Capacity Insurance Company |
OPPOSING PARTY |
None |
MOTION
Intervenor North American Capacity Insurance Company (NAC) moves to
continue the trial, and all trial-related dates, which is currently set for May
25, 2023, to a date in late January or early February of 2024. 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, NAC seeks a continuance of trial in light of its recent filing
of a First Amended Complaint in Intervention (FACII), and Defendant in
Intervention Bryan Rabin, Inc.’s (Rabin) intention to challenge the recently
filed FACII. Further, NAC advances a
stipulation signed by NAC, Rabin, and Plaintiff Summer Healy-Chapin
(Healy-Chapin), agreeing to the requested trial continuance. The stipulation sets forward the following:
(1) Defendant Service Concierge, Inc. (SCI) was discovered to be a suspended
corporation; (2) on September 13, 2022, the Court granted the ex parte
application of NAC to intervene on behalf of SCI; (3) NAC filed a Complaint in
Intervention on September 16, 2022, and served said Complaint upon Rabin on
October 14, 2022; (4) after meeting and conferring with Rabin, NAC agreed to
file an FACII, and filed and served said FACII on January 12, 2023; and (4)
Rabin intends to further challenge the FACII.
Accordingly, the Court finds NAC has shown good cause for a trial
continuance pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332.
CONCLUSION
AND ORDER
Therefore, the Court grants NAC’s motion to continue trial and all
trial related dates and orders as follows:
·
The trial date, currently set for May 25, 2023,
is continued to February 2, 2024 at 8:30 AM in Department 32.
·
The Final Status Conference, currently set for
July 14, 2023, is continued to January 18, 2024 at 10:00 AM in Department 32.
·
All discovery and pre-trial
motion cut-off dates shall be based upon the new trial date of February 2, 2024.
·
Per the Discovery Act, the parties shall meet
and confer forthwith to schedule and complete all non-expert discovery and to
prepare for the completion of expert discovery to obviate the need for a
further continuance of the trial.
·
No further continuance of the trial absent
sufficient good cause.
NAC shall provide notice of the Court’s orders and file a proof of
service of such.