Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 21STCV09224, Date: 2023-04-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV09224    Hearing Date: April 13, 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

MOTION

Defendants Shippers Transport Express, Inc., and Toni Doninelli (collectively,  “Defendants”) move to continue the trial, including all related dates and deadlines in this matter, which is currently set for August 21, 2023, to after September 14, 2023. Plaintiffs Jorge Medrano (“Medrano”) and Eduardo Ramirez (“Ramirez”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed oppositions to the motion. Defendants reply to both oppositions.  

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 a continuance of trial because they have filed and served a motion for leave to amend answer.  That motion is set for hearing on September 14, 2023 which was the first available hearing date.  Defendants rely on a declaration of Defendants’ counsel, Ilia Borisov (“Counsel”).  Counsel states that on January 26, 2023, Defendants filed and served their Amended Motion for Leave to Amend. (Declaration of Ilia Borisov, ¶ 9.) They were able to schedule a hearing date on September 14, 2023. (Declaration of Ilia Borisov, ¶ 10.) Counsel states that on March 13, 2023, Defendants sought an earlier date for the hearing through the Court’s reservation system, but the earliest hearing date was October 25, 2023. (Declaration of Ilia Borisov, ¶ 13.)   

In opposition, Medrano contends that Defendants have not established good cause to continue the trial based on an untimely motion for leave to amend Defendants’ answer which stems in part from Defendants being dilatory in seeking relief.  In particular, Medrano contends that there is no factual and legal basis for Defendants to amend their answer.  Ramirez makes similar arguments in opposing the trial continuance. 

            Although the Court finds that Defendants have set forth good cause for the trial continuance, the Court recognizes Plaintiffs’ interest in maintaining current trial date of August 21, 2023.  Therefore, in weighing the competing interests of the parties, the Court denies Defendants’ motion to continue trial, but on its own motion, orders as follows:

·         The hearing on the Motion for Leave To Amend Answer is advanced and reset for hearing on May 5, 2023 at 1:30 PM in Department 32.  Opposition papers shall be filed and served on or before April 21, 2023.  Reply papers shall be filed and served on or before April 28, 2023. 

Defendants shall give notice of the Court’s orders and file a proof of service of such.