Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 19STCV29013, Date: 2022-09-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV29013    Hearing Date: September 13, 2022    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

MOTION

Plaintiffs Sheram Nadimyan (“Sheram”), Anahit Nadimyan, Yelena Nadimyan, and Zhorzh Nadimyan (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) sued defendants Lyft, Inc. (“Lyft”) and City of Glendale (“City”) based on the death of Novar Ismailyan (“Decedent”).  Plaintiffs allege defendant Mira Gjura (“Gjura”) struck decedent while driving a vehicle within the course and scope of her employment or agency with Lyft. 

Lyft moves to continue trial, which is currently set for September 19, 2022, to December 19, 2022, or until such time as the stay of discovery on Gjura is lifted, with all pre-trial motion and discovery cutoffs to be based on the new trial date.  Plaintiffs and City oppose the motion.  

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, in essence, Lyft seeks a trial continuance to permit the parties time to complete necessary discovery with respect to Gjura.  According to counsel for Lyft, Ryan M. Sellers (“Sellers”), discovery as to Gjura remains stayed pending the resolution of the criminal action filed against her in connection with the subject collision, but all other discovery has been completed.  (Declaration of Ryan M. Sellers, ¶ 2.)  Lyft therefore contends that, because Lyft’s alleged liability is derivative of Gjura’s, Lyft will be prejudiced by having to proceed to trial without the opportunity to conduct discovery with respect to Gjura.

In opposition, both Plaintiffs and City argue that Lyft has failed to show good cause for a continuance.  Specifically, Plaintiffs and City argue that the criminal proceedings against Gjura have no end in sight, and Lyft has not otherwise established good cause under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332.  Plaintiffs also assert Lyft was dilatory in bringing the motion and that, due to Sheram’s advanced age, Plaintiff’s will be prejudiced by an additional continuance.

Despite Plaintiffs’ and City’s contentions, the Court finds Lyft has shown good cause for a trial continuance pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332.  However, because discovery is now closed, the Court denies Lyft’s request to set all pre-trial motion and discovery cutoffs based on the new trial date.  The parties may seek the reopening of discovery upon noticed motion, as necessary.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Therefore, the Court grants in part Lyft’s motion to continue trial and orders as follows:

• The trial date, currently set for September 19, 2022, is continued to December 20, 2022 at 8:30 AM in Department 32.

   

• The Final Status Conference is set for December 6, 2022 at 10:00 AM in Department 32.

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