Judge: Ronald F. Frank, Case: 22STCV05507, Date: 2022-12-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV05507    Hearing Date: December 21, 2022    Dept: 8

Tentative Ruling¿ 

¿¿ 

HEARING DATE:                 December 21, 2022¿¿ 

¿¿ 

CASE NUMBER:                  22STCV05507

¿¿ 

CASE NAME:                        Manuela Sahagun v. Long Beach Unified School District, et al

¿¿ 

MOVING PARTY:                Plaintiffs, Manuela Sahagun 

¿¿ 

RESPONDING PARTY:       None

¿¿ 

TRIAL DATE:                        None set¿ 

¿¿ 

MOTION:¿                              (1) Motion for Trial Preference

¿ 

Tentative Rulings:                  (1) Motion for Trial Preference GRANTED. Parties to discuss trial availability in the month of March, 2023 at the hearing on this unopposed motion

¿¿ 

I.                   BACKGROUND 

This case is a wrongful death action by Plaintiff Manuela Sahagun, successor in Interest of Manuela Rodriguez (“Plaintiff”) against Defendant Long Beach Unified School District (LBUSD”), and DOES 1 through 10. On November 4, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion for trial preference pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 36 subdivision (b). To date, no opposition has been filed.

II.                PARTY’S REQUEST 

Plaintiff Manuela Sahagun asks the Court to set a preferential trial date within 120 days due to Plaintiff’s age. Plaintiffs make this motion because Plaintiff Isael Rodriguez Chowdhury  because Plaintiff is under 14 years old. Plaintiff Isael Rodriguez Chowdhury is less than 2 years old, having been born on April 7, 2021.

III.             ANALYSIS

A.    Legal Standard

California Code of Civil Procedure section 36 states, in relevant part: . . . (b) A civil action to recover damages for wrongful death or personal injury shall be entitled to preference upon the motion of any party to the action who is under 14 years of age unless the court finds that the party does not have a substantial interest in the case as a whole. A civil action subject to subdivision (a) shall be given preference over a case subject to this subdivision.  (c) Unless the court otherwise orders: (1) A party may file and serve a motion for preference supported by a declaration of the moving party that all essential parties have been served with process or have appeared. . . . (f) Upon the granting of such a motion for preference, the court shall set the matter for trial not more than 120 days from that date. . . .” 

Granting a trial preference is mandatory where a party satisfies Code of Civil Procedure section 36 subdivision (b), which is interpreted the same manner as subdivision (a) regarding litigants over the age of 70 with health conditions.  (Peters v. Superior Court (1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 218, 224.)  “Failure to complete discovery or other pretrial matters does not affect the absolute substantive right to trial preference for those litigants who qualify for preference . . . The express legislative mandate for trial preference is a substantive public policy concern which [supersedes] such considerations.”  (Swaithes v. Superior Court (1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 1082, 1086-1087 [citation omitted].)  “Where a party meets the requisite standard for calendar preference . . . , preference must be granted. No weighing of interests is involved.”  (Fox v. Superior Court (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 529, 535.)  

B.     Discussion

Plaintiff is under 14 years of age as stated by his counsel. (Declaration of Arnoldo Casillas (“Casillas Decl.”), ¶ 2.)  Plaintiff’s complaint seeks to recover damages for the wrongful death of his mother. Accordingly, the Court finds the motion is properly granted.  Plaintiff is a minor under the age of 14 with a substantial interest in this wrongful death case. (Motion, p. 5.)

As set forth in the Declaration of Arnoldo Casillas and supporting birth certificate, Plaintiff Isael Rodriguez Chowdhury’s date of birth is April 7, 2021, and is one (1) year old. Plaintiff notes that Plaintiff Isael Rodriguez Chowdhury, is the biological son of decedent Manuela Rodriguez, having suffered the loss of his mother as a result of the incident which is the subject of Plaintiffs’ complaint. As such, Plaintiff asserts that he has a substantial and direct interest in this case. Moreover, Plaintiff contends that the prompt resolution of this case will help in securing “closure” sooner rather than later and thus would help relieve the psychological and emotional stress that this plaintiff would suffer. Further, Plaintiff argues that case law favors preferential trial date setting under these circumstances. “There can be no dispute that entitlement to a preferential trial date safeguards a substantive right to recover damages for pain, suffering and disfigurement.” Rice v. Sup. Ct. (1982) 136 C.A.3d 81, 89.

Additionally, Plaintiff notes that all essential parties have been served with process and have appeared. Defendant Long Beach Unified School District answered Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint on August 25, 2022, and discovery has already commenced. Plaintiffs do not intend to serve Defendant Eddie Gonzalez and will not prosecute this matter against him individually. Lastly, Plaintiff asserts that in the related case, Manuela Sahagun v. Long Beach Unified School District, Case number 22STCV05507, Defendant Long Beach Unified School District has appeared in the action. The parties to both actions have stipulated to consolidate both actions for all purposes. The stipulation is pending before the court.  The parties should be prepared to discuss any issues raised by consolidation that might affect the trial setting here. 

Good cause having been shown and in the absence of any opposition, the Court’s tentative is to GRANT the motion and set the trial in late March of 2023.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.