Judge: Serena R. Murillo, Case: 20STCV20180, Date: 2023-04-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV20180    Hearing Date: April 25, 2023    Dept: 29

TENTATIVE

Defendant’s motion to continue trial is GRANTED. Trial is continued to August 22, 2023 at 8:30 a.m.; FSC August 14, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. Expert discovery cutoff dates, only, 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 set for August 4, 2023, to August 22, 2023, arguing that good cause exists as current defense counsel is retiring from the practice of law later this month, and therefore, the matter is being transferred to new defense counsel for handling. While the parties had previously stipulated to continue trial to August 4, 2023, defense counsel mistakenly understood that new defense counsel would be available for the stipulated trial date in early August. However, new defense counsel is not available for trial until August 22, 2023, due to previously scheduled international travel beginning July 17, 2023 through early August. New defense counsel has additional calendar conflicts in August which also preclude availability for trial immediately upon her return from travel. In addition, new defense trial counsel will need to personally take the depositions of plaintiff’s expert witnesses.

Plaintiff argues in opposition that her counsel relied in defense counsel’s representation of new defense counsel’s availability for trial and obtained the availability of Plaintiff and her experts for this date. Plaintiff argues she will be unduly prejudiced if trial is continued to the date proposed by Defendant’s Noticed Motion. Plaintiff opposes reopening discovery in this case. This case has been continued multiple times and Plaintiff has been cooperative with all Defense counsel that have been assigned on this case. Plaintiff has been diligently providing all the information that defense counsel has requested.

The Court finds there is good cause to continue trial as defense counsel is not available on the date currently set. Moreover, while Plaintiff argues she will be prejudiced, she has not explained why. For example, she has not stated that she is not available on August 22, 2023, or her experts will not be available. The Court notes that Defendant would be prejudiced if trial was not continued as Defendant would be without defense counsel to try the case. The motion is therefore granted, and trial is continued to August 22, 2023.

The Court notes that Defendant is only asking for expert discovery to be continued as the parties previously agreed that all other discovery would remain closed.

Conclusion

Accordingly, the motion to continue trial is GRANTED. Trial is continued to August 22, 2023. Expert discovery cutoff dates, only, shall be based on the new trial date.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.