Judge: Michelle Williams Court, Case: BC603512, Date: 2022-09-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC603512    Hearing Date: September 26, 2022    Dept: 74

BC603512      WENLI ZENG VS HUI RONG DAI

OSC re Entry of Judgment

TENTATIVE RULING:  The court has received and reviewed defendants; objection to the Tentative Statement of Decision and will issue a Final Statement of Decision.  Today’s OSC re Entry of Judgment is CONTINUED to November 2, 2022 at 8:30 a.m.  The September 27, 2022 Unopposed Motion to Dismiss is ADVANCED TO TODAY and the court issues the following TENTATIVE RULING:  Defendants Hui Rong Dai, Yun Jiao and Chen Dai’s Motion for Order to Dismiss Under Code of Civil Procedure to C.C.P § 583.310 is DENIED.

 Background and Discussion

Plaintiff Wenli Zeng filed this case for breach of contract and fraud on December 8, 2015,

against defendants Hui Rong Dai a/k/a/ Dai Huirong, Yun Jiao a/k/a Yun Jue, and Chen Dai. Plaintiff filed the (operative) second amended complaint on October 10, 2018. All defendants filed a cross complaint for fraud, rescission and declaratory relief against Wenli Zeng on February 7, 2019. All defendants answered the second amended complaint on November 19, 2018. Cross defendant Wenli Zeng answered the cross complaint on February 28, 2019.

On February 24, 2022, the Court denied Defendants’ first Ex Parte Application for Shortening Time to Hear Motion to Dismiss Under C.C.P. 583.310. On February 28, 2022, the Court denied Defendants’ second Ex Parte Application for Shortening Time to Hear Motion to Dismiss Under C.C.P. 583.310.

On March 10, 2022, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 583.310 based upon the asserted failure to bring the action to trial within five years. The motion noticed the hearing for September 27, 2022.

On March 11, 2022, the Court denied Defendants’ third Ex Parte Application for Shortening Time to Hear Motion to Dismiss Under C.C.P. 583.310, noting “on 9/8/2021 counsel waived the 5-year statute.” Defendants’ motion to dismiss has remained on the Court’s calendar.

On March 23, 2022, trial commenced and counsel for all parties appeared. On July 22, 2022, the Court issued its intended statement of decision.

Trial having concluded in this matter, there is no basis to dismiss the case pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 583.310. (See generally Southern Pac. Co. v. Seaboard Mills (1962) 207 Cal.App.2d 97, 104; Holt v. Pardue (1960) 178 Cal.App.2d 528, 533.)