Judge Michael E. Whitaker, Case 20STCV40988 2022-10-25 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 20STCV40988, Date: 2022-10-25 Tentative Ruling

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.

Defendants Armando Flores and Patricia Clemente (collectively, Defendants) move to continue the Trial Date, Final Status Conference date, and continue all discovery deadlines in accordance with the new trial date, which is currently set for November 22, 2022, to May 24, 2023. Plaintiff Santos Reyes (Plaintiff) opposes the motion.

Preliminarily, the Court finds that Defendants’ have failed to attach a copy of the memorandum of points and authorities[1] as well as a declaration of counsel setting forth good cause[2] to the motion. Thus, the Court denies the motion without prejudice as procedurally defective under California Rules of Court, rules 3.1113 and 3.1332.

[1] “A party filing a motion, except for a motion listed in rule 3.1114, must serve and file a supporting memorandum. The court may construe the absence of a memorandum as an admission that the motion or special demurrer is not meritorious and cause for its denial and, in the case of a demurrer, as a waiver of all grounds not supported.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1113(a).)

[2] “A party seeking a continuance of the date set for trial, whether contested or uncontested or stipulated to by the parties, must make the request for a continuance by a noticed motion or an ex parte application under the rules in chapter 4 of this division, with supporting declarations.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(b); see also id. at Rule 3.1332(c) [grounds for continuance].)

DEPARTMENT	32
HEARING DATE	October 25, 2022
CASE NUMBER	20STCV40988
MOTION	Motion to Continue Trial
MOVING PARTIES	Defendants Armando Flores and Patricia Clemente
OPPOSING PARTY	Plaintiff Santos Reyes