Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case: 20STCV42130, Date: 2023-06-29 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV42130    Hearing Date: March 6, 2024    Dept: 39

Shuo Wang, M.D. v. Victor Le, et al.

Case No. 20STCV42130

Ex Parte Application

Order to Show Cause

            Plaintiff Shuo Wang, M.D. (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on November 3, 2020.  Plaintiff intends to file a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint.  Because the first available hearing date is April 10, 2024, Plaintiff has filed an ex parte application for leave to file the second amended complaint or for an order shortening time for a noticed motion and advancing the hearing.  The ex parte application is denied.  The first available hearing date is April 10,

2024, at 8:30 a.m.  The parties may seek a trial continuance if the Court grants the motion and the current trial date does not afford sufficient time to prepare.    

            The Court issues an Order to Show Cause why the five-year date should not be tolled.  Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 583.310, an action shall be brought to trial within five years.  However, for purposes of computing this time, the Court excludes all time for which “[b]ringing the action to trial . . . was impossible, impracticable, or futile.”  (Code Civ. Proc. § 583.340(c).)  The Court is prepared to exclude the following time periods:

1.       Beginning on March 16, 2020, civil jury trials were suspended in the Los Angeles County Superior Court due to COVID-19.  Pursuant to the Presiding Judge’s order of July 10, 2020, civil jury trials would resume on the first court day in January 2021, which is January 4, 2021.  Therefore, the time period from the filing date of the complaint (November 3, 2020) to January 4, 2021, which is 62 days, is excludable. 

2.       Although the Court reopened for civil jury trials on January 4, 2021, the Presiding Judge authorized the civil judges to determine whether it was feasible to conduct jury trials in their respective courtrooms, in consideration of issues such as the size of the courtroom, the number of participants, and the length of the trial.  It was impossible for Department #39 to proceed with jury trials from January 4, 2021, to May 11, 2021, due to the size of Department #39, the requirements of social distancing, the number of attorneys and parties involved in jury trials, and the minimum length of jury trials.  The Court also determined that it was impossible to proceed with trials due to the difficulty in summoning a sufficient number of jurors for jury selection given the needs of other courtrooms that were able to conduct jury trials.  These conditions existed until May 11, 2021, when Department #39 re-opened for jury trials.  Therefore, this time period—January 4, 2021, to May 11, 2021, which is 127 days—is excludable.

The complaint was filed on November 3, 2020.  Under normal circumstances, the deadline to proceed to trial on the cases would be November 3, 2025.  Based upon the Court’s findings and calculations, the Court would exclude 189 days from this time period.  Therefore, the new deadline for this case to proceed to trial would be May 11, 2026. 

The Court shall hold a hearing on this Order to Show Cause on April 10, 2024, at 8:30 a.m.  Any party may file a written objection on or before April 3, 2024.  Absent good cause, the Court shall adopt these findings and re-set the deadlines for this case to proceed to trial as May 11, 2026. 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

            The Court orders as follows:

            1.         Plaintiff’s ex parte application is denied.

            2.         Because the Court will be dark, the Court advances and continues Defendants’ motion to quash from April 2, 2024, to April 10, 2024, at 8:30 a.m.

            3.         The Court shall hold a hearing on the Order to Show Cause why the five-year date should not be tolled for April 10, 2024, at 8:30 a.m.

            4.         Plaintiff’s counsel shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.