Judge Serena R. Murillo, Case 19STCV03327 2022-09-27 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Serena R. Murillo, Case: 19STCV03327, Date: 2022-09-27 Tentative Ruling

DEPARTMENT 29 - LAW AND MOTION RULINGS IMPORTANT (PLEASE SEND YOUR E-MAIL TO DEPT. 29 NOT DEPT. 2)

Communicating with the Court Staff re the Tentative Ruling 1. Please notify the courtroom staff by email not later than 9:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative ruling rather than argue the motion. The email address is SSCDEPT29@lacourt.org. Please do not use any other email address. 2. You must include the other parties on the email by "cc." 3. Include the word "SUBMISSION" in all caps in the Subject line and include your name, contact information, the case number, and the party you represent in the body of the email. If you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the motions. THE COURT WILL HEAR ARGUMENT UNLESS BOTH SIDES SUBMIT ON THE TENTATIVE. 4. Include the words "SUBMISSION BUT WILL APPEAR" if you submit, but one or both parties will nevertheless appear. 5. For other communications with Court Staff a. OFF-CALENDAR should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have agreed to have a matter placed off-calendar. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) date of proceeding. b. CASE SETTLED should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have agreed that the case has settled for all purposes. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) whether notice of settlement/dismissal documents have been filed; (c) if (b) has not been done, a date one year from the date of your email which will be a date set by the court for an OSC for dismissal of the case. c. STIPULATION should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have stipulated that a matter before the court can be postponed. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) what proceeding is agreed to be postponed e.g. Trial, FSC; (c) the agreed-upon future date; (d) whether all parties waive notice if the Court informs all counsel/parties that the agreed-upon date is satisfactory. This communication should be used only for matters that are agreed to be postponed and not for orders shortening time. 6. PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT ALL COMMUNICATIONS WITH COURT STAFF DEAL ONLY WITH SCHEDULING AND ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS AND DO NOT DISCUSS THE MERITS OF ANY CASE. (UPDATED 6/17/2020)

IMPORTANT: In light of the COVID-19 emergency, the Court encourages all parties to appear remotely. The capacity in the courtroom is extremely limited. The Court appreciates the cooperation of counsel and the litigants.

ALSO NOTE: If the moving party does not contact the court to submit on the tentative and does not appear (either remotely or in person), the motion will be taken off calendar. THE TENTATIVE RULING WILL NOT BE THE ORDER OF THE COURT.

Case Number: 19STCV03327 Hearing Date: September 27, 2022 Dept: 29

Camecia Lee v. Yolanda Yvette Coleman

Tuesday, September 27, 2022

Motion to Continue Trial filed by Defendant Yolanda Yvette Coleman

TENTATIVE

The motion to continue trial and related dates is GRANTED. Trial is continued to April 10, 2023

Legal Standard

Although disfavored, the trial date may be continued for “good cause,” which includes (without limitation): (1) unavailability of trial counsel or witnesses due to “death, illness, or other excusable circumstances”; (2) the addition of a new party depriving the new party (or other parties) from conducting discovery and preparing for trial; (3) “excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts”; or (4) “[a] significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case” preventing it from being ready for trial. (Id., Rule 3.1332(c).)

Other relevant considerations may include: “(1) The proximity of the trial date; [¶] (2) Whether there was any previous continuance, extension of time, or delay of trial due to any party; [¶] (3) The length of the continuance requested; [¶] (4) The availability of alternative means to address the problem that gave rise to the motion or application for a continuance; [¶] (5) The prejudice that parties or witnesses will suffer as a result of the continuance; [¶] (6) If the case is entitled to a preferential trial setting, the reasons for that status and whether the need for a continuance outweighs the need to avoid delay; [¶] (7) The court's calendar and the impact of granting a continuance on other pending trials; [¶] (8) Whether trial counsel is engaged in another trial; [¶] (9) Whether all parties have stipulated to a continuance; [¶] (10) Whether the interests of justice are best served by a continuance, by the trial of the matter, or by imposing conditions on the continuance; and [¶] (11) Any other fact or circumstance relevant to the fair determination of the motion or application.” (Id., Rule 3.1332(d).)

Discussion

Defendant moves to continue trial and all related deadlines, arguing that good cause exists because Defendant’s motion to re-open discovery was granted in order to allow Defendant to conduct discovery on Plaintiff’s newly identified traumatic brain injury; Defendant seeks to conduct a neuropsychological examination. Defendant has been attempting to meet and confer with Plaintiff’s counsel to set up the examination before the January 5, 2023 trial date, but Plaintiff’s counsel has not responded. Defendant reserved a hearing to compel Plaintiff’s mental examination, which is set for March 8, 2023, after the current trial date. Further, Defendant argues that Plaintiff has not produced her two experts for deposition.

Plaintiff argues that there is no good cause to continue trial. Defendant has known at least since Plaintiff’s June 10, 2019, verified discovery responses of Plaintiff’s allegations of a TBI by way of a concussion. A concussion is a brain injury that affects your brain function. Plaintiff argues Defendant has had more than adequate time to designate a neurologist expert witness, meet and confer regarding the possibility of a neuropsychological exam, and schedule a hearing to order such an exam well before start of trial, particularly since this trial has already been continued multiple times. Plaintiff also argues that Defendant’s requested continuance of 60 days is grossly disproportionate to the ten- day period Defendant repeatedly mentions that they were unable to schedule a meeting with Plaintiff. Plaintiff argues she does not have to be subjected to a mental examination, an examination in which Plaintiff is even denied the benefit of having her attorneys with her, for Defendant to make an assessment regarding Plaintiff’s TBI.

Defendant argues in reply that Plaintiff is preventing defendant from conducting the discovery that the Court has already ruled is necessary for this litigation. Defendant argues that the Court in its August 15, 2022 order to reopen discovery already agreed with defendant’s observation that although there may have a generic diagnosis for a blunt head injury, there was no diagnosis that plaintiff sustained a traumatic brain injury until June 2022 when plaintiff informed defendant of all of the recent treatment she underwent related to her head. The Court has already found that there was no lack of diligence on the part of Defendant in seeking the subject discovery.

The Court finds there is good cause to continue trial as the parties cannot agree as to whether a mental examination is appropriate here, and the hearing on the motion to compel is set after the trial date. Thus, Defendant is still in the process of conducting discovery and is not yet prepared for trial. While Plaintiff opposes a brief trial continuance, she has not argued that she would be prejudiced by one. As such, Defendants’ motion is granted. Trial is continued to April 10, 2023. Related deadlines are to correlate with the new trial date.

Conclusion

Accordingly, the motion to continue trial and related dates is GRANTED. Trial is continued to April 10, 2023.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.