Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case: 19STCV07692, Date: 2022-08-30 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV07692    Hearing Date: August 30, 2022    Dept: 39

Guadalupe Enciso v. Avanti Hospital, LLC

Case No. 19STCV07692

Motion to Reopen Discovery

Plaintiff Guadalupe Enciso (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Avanti Hospitals, LLC (“Avanti”), asserting a single cause of action for medical malpractice.  Plaintiff alleges that she fell while she was treated in the Emergency Department of East Los Angeles Doctors Hospital, which is a “doing business name” of Avanti, because the bed rail was not raised.  Now, Avanti seeks to reopen discovery to take Plaintiff’s deposition. 

In determining whether to re-open discovery, the court must consider the necessity of and reasons for the additional discovery, the diligence or lack thereof by the party seeking to reopen discovery in attempting to complete discovery prior to the cutoff, whether permitting the discovery will prevent the case from going forward on the trial date or will otherwise prejudice any party, and any past continuances of the trial date.  (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.050, subd. (b).)

            Avanti seeks to reopen discovery because Plaintiff produced a handwritten note about the incident after discovery had closed.  Avanti had served Requests for Production of Documents (“RPDs”) on May 26, 2020, requesting, among other things, all documents “including notes, correspondence, calendars, diaries or memoranda, concerning the incident, its attendant circumstances, and the damages you claim.”  (Declaration of Stephanie Charles, Exh. C.)  Plaintiff provided a response on July 24, 2020, indicating there were no changes to her previous responses.  (Id., Exh. D.)  Then, inexplicably, on February 14, 2022, Plaintiff produced a handwritten note about the incident that was dated February 19, 2019.  (Id., Exh. E.) 

            Plaintiff’s counsel argues that Avanti has waived the right to seek an additional deposition based upon this document because she did not seek to compel the deposition before discovery closed.  The document was produced on February 14, 2022, and fact discovery closed on March 21, 2022.  (See Court’s Minute Order, dated March 1, 2022.)  Nevertheless, there is good cause.  In fact, the Court granted the co-defendants’ motion to take Plaintiff’s deposition.  (See Court’s Minute Order, dated June 22, 2022.)  Then, the Court granted the co-defendants’ motions for summary judgment without the deposition having been taken.  (See Court’s Minute Order, dated July 22, 2022.)  It is clear that questions about this handwritten document would have been asked at that deposition, but it never went forward.  Therefore, Plaintiff’s counsel articulates good cause to reopen discovery for the limited purpose of inquiring about this document.

            Plaintiff’s counsel argues that the document has not been translated into English.  Plaintiff’s counsel raises a valid point, as the Court is unable to determine whether a subsequent deposition truly is necessary based upon the contents of the document.  Therefore, the hearing on the motion to reopen discovery is continued to October 14, 2022, at 8:30 a.m.  The Court orders Avanti’s counsel to file a certified transaction of the document at issue on or before September 16, 2022.  Plaintiff’s counsel may file a supplemental opposition, and Avanti’s counsel may file a supplemental opposition based upon statutory deadlines.

The record is clear that the parties will not be ready for trial.  The Court ordered a mental examination of Plaintiff, and Plaintiff is seeking appellate review.  It appears that a further deposition of Plaintiff may be necessary.  Therefore, the Court advances and vacates the final status conference and trial dates. 

Based upon the foregoing, the Court orders as follows:

1.         The hearing on the motion to reopen discovery is continued to October 14, 2022, at 8:30 a.m.

            2.         The Court orders Avanti’s counsel to file a certified transaction of the document at issue on or before September 16, 2022.  Plaintiff’s counsel may file a supplemental opposition, and Avanti’s counsel may file a supplemental opposition based upon statutory deadlines.

            3.         The Court advances and vacates the final status conference and trial dates.

            4.         The Court shall hold a trial setting conference on October 14, 2022, at 8:30 a.m.

            5.         Avanti’s counsel shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.