Judge: Serena R. Murillo, Case: 20STCV12027, Date: 2023-03-17 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV12027    Hearing Date: March 17, 2023    Dept: 29

TENTATIVE

The unopposed motion to continue trial and related dates is GRANTED. Trial is continued to January 17, 2024. All motion and discovery cutoff dates shall be based on the new trial date.

Legal Standard

California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (c) states that 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).) 

Code of Civil Procedure section 2024.050 allows a court to grant leave to complete discovery proceedings. In doing so, a court shall consider matters relevant to the leave requested, including, but not limited to: (1) the necessity of the discovery, (2) the diligence in seeking the discovery or discovery motion, (3) the likelihood of interference with the trial calendar or prejudice to a party, and (4) the length of time that has elapsed between previous trial dates. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2024.050.)

Discussion

Defendant moves to continue trial to January 15, 2024, arguing good cause exists. First, Defendant’s current counsel has yet to complete written discovery and Plaintiff has yet to submit to necessary defense medical examinations. Further, Plaintiff has yet to complete any written discovery in this matter. Defendant has been unable to respond to Plaintiff’s written discovery because Defendant Frankel has not communicated with Defendant’s current counsel after numerous telephonic messages, e-mails and letters directed towards her. Frankel is simply not defending herself in this case and Defense counsel has no reasonable expectation of locating or establishing any form or meaningful communications with her. Defendant’s current counsel, filed a motion for State Farm Automobile Insurance Company to intervene as Defendant, which is set for October 16, 2023. The current trial date does not allow sufficient time for State Farm Automobile Insurance Company to intervene as the Defendant, conduct necessary discovery, and adequately prepare for trial. Further, Trial counsel for Defendant currently has a trial scheduled for June 5, 2023 (Matthew Smith Radosevich v. Los Feliz Bliss, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 20STCV43214), which is extremely unlikely to settle prior to the trial date. The case is anticipated to last beyond one week, and will thus interfere with the June 14, 2023 trial date in the instant matter.

The Court finds there is good cause to continue trial as defense counsel still needs to conduct discovery, Defendant has been unresponsive, and there is a motion to intervene set after the trial date due to the Court’s congested calendar.  In addition, defense counsel will be engaged in another trial. Further, Plaintiff has not opposed this motion, and thus, it does not appear Plaintiff would be prejudiced by a continuance. As such, Defendant’s motion is granted. Trial is continued to January 17, 2024. All motion and discovery cutoff dates shall be based on the new trial date.

Conclusion

Accordingly, the motion to continue trial and related dates is GRANTED. Trial is continued to January 17, 2024. All motion and discovery cutoff dates shall be based on the new trial date.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.