Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 20STCV24440, Date: 2023-05-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV24440    Hearing Date: May 25, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

EUN HEE SO,

                        Plaintiff,

            vs.

 

HARRY HO YEN AHN, ET AL.,

 

                        Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO: 20STCV24440

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER CONTINUING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

 

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

May 25, 2023

 

Plaintiff, Eun Hee So, filed this action against Defendants Harry Ho Yen Ahn and Grace S. Ahn, individually, and as trustees of the Ahn Family Trust, PMD & Company, and Does 1-50 alleging causes of action for negligence and premises liability. The complaint alleges that Defendants negligently maintained a staircase on their premises. The staircase allegedly was poorly lit, and the steps were unmarked, causing Plaintiff to slip and sustain injuries.

 

Defendants, Harry Ho Yen Ahn and Grace S. Ahn, individually, and as Trustees of The Ahn Family Trust (“Defendants”) now move for summary judgment.  Plaintiff opposes the motion, and Defendants have filed a reply. 

 

The Court CONTINUES the matter to allow for the parties to correct the following deficiencies.

 

            Defendants’ Separate Statement is missing the reference to the exhibit number and proper title, and thus fails to conform with the California Rules of Court, rule 3.1350. “The supporting papers shall include a separate statement setting forth plainly and concisely all material facts that the moving party contends are undisputed. Each of the material facts stated shall be followed by a reference to the supporting evidence.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 437c (b)(1).) Specifically, the separate statement shall include “citation to the evidence in support of each material fact must include reference to the exhibit, title, page, and line numbers.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1350(d)(3).  

 

             The purpose of the separate statement is to assist the court in determining quickly and efficiently whether material facts are disputed. The failure to file a separate statement that conforms to Rule 3.1350 impedes this purpose. (United Community Church v. Garcin (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 327, 337.) Where the separate statement does not comply, the court has discretion to continue the motion to permit the party to file a conforming statement. (United Community Church, supra, 231 Cal.App.3d at 337.)  

 

Additionally, Plaintiff’s expert declaration for Eris Barillas is missing the referenced Exhibits. Plaintiff is ordered to file an amended expert declaration with the attached Exhibits.

 

            Trial is set in this matter for September 29, 2023. Thus, a short continuance will not affect the ability for this summary judgment to be heard.

 

            Defendants are ordered to file their amended Separate Statement ten (10) days before the scheduled hearing. Defendant is further requested to provide or file their Exhibits 1-5 in electronic form to the court. Plaintiff is to file the Exhibits to the Barillas Declaration ten (10) days before the scheduled hearing. Any evidentiary objections are to be filed five (5) days prior to the hearing. No further briefing will be permitted.

 

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is CONTINUED to June 28, 2023.

 

Moving Defendants are ordered to give notice. 

 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

 

Dated this 25th day of May 2023

 

 

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim

Judge of the Superior Court