Judge: Stephen P. Pfahler, Case: 22STCV15453, Date: 2022-12-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV15453    Hearing Date: December 12, 2022    Dept: F49

Dept. F-49

Date: 12-12-22 a/f 1-17-23

Case #22STCV15453

Trial Date: 7-17-23

PREFFERENCE

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff, Rose Bryan

RESPONDING PARTY: Defendants, CP Lyons Station SC LLC, et al.

RELIEF REQUESTED

Motion for Trial Preference

SUMMARY OF ACTION

On May 19, 2020, plaintiff Rose Bryan, was walking to her car in a parking lot owned and operated by Defendants CP Lyons Station SC LLC, et al., when Plaintiff tripped on an uneven asphalt surface in the parking lot in front of the Baskin Robbins store.

On May 10, and June 8, 2022, Bryan filed a complaint and first amended complaint for negligence, and premises liability. On August 22, 2022, the case was transferred from Department 31 in the personal injury hub to Department 49 in Chatsworth.

RULING: Granted.

Plaintiff Rose Bryan moves for trial preference on grounds that Plaintiff is 80 years old, and Plaintiff’s current health condition supports trial preference. Defendants, CP Lyons Station SC LLC, et al. challenges the application based on the failure to establish a medical necessity for preference, and prejudice as a result of preference under the circumstances. Plaintiff in reply challenges the opposition as misplaced in that it relies on an inapplicable standard for Plaintiff. Plaintiff denies any necessity for the presentation of medical documentation, and contends relief is mandatory. The court electronic filing system shows no reply at the time of the tentative ruling publication cutoff.

Code of Civil Procedure section 36 subdivision (a) states in relevant part: “A party to a civil action who is over 70 years of age may petition the court for a preference, which the court shall grant if the court makes both of the following findings: (1) The party has a substantial interest in the action as a whole. (2) The health of the party is such that a preference is necessary to prevent prejudicing the party’s interest in the litigation.”

The motion presents declarations establishing that Plaintiff is 80 years old, and suffering from a myriad of medical conditions beyond the injuries as a result of the accident. While the declaration falls short of a showing that Plaintiff’s life expectancy falls to six months or less, the motion is not brought under this standard. (Code Civ. Proc., § 36, subd. (d).) The court finds the motion sufficiently establishes a basis of relief, and additionally, in its discretion, finds the interests of justice support the advancement of the trial given the age, preexisting medical conditions, and injuries to Plaintiff.

The trial date is currently set for July 17, 2023—217 days or seven months and five days from the date of the motion. “Upon the granting of such a motion for preference, the court shall set the matter for trial not more than 120 days from that date and there shall be no continuance beyond 120 days from the granting of the motion for preference except for physical disability of a party or a party’s attorney, or upon a showing of good cause stated in the record. Any continuance shall be for no more than 15 days and no more than one continuance for physical disability may be granted to any party.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 36, subd. (f).) Subtracting 97 days from the current trial date places the trial date on Tuesday April 11, 2023. Given the court sets it’s trials for Mondays, the trial date is therefore set for a starting date no later than April 10, 2023, with the reservation of a 15 days continuance, if necessary

The court also acknowledges Defendants’ right to a motion for summary judgment. (See Polibrid Coatings, Inc. v. Superior Court (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 920, 923; Mediterranean Const. Co. v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 257, 262.) The court orders the parties to cooperate in the expedited setting of the depositions of witnesses, experts and parties. Depositions can occur via video or telephonic platform, due to Covid concerns and/or in the interests of efficiently expediting discovery should the individual defendant require remote access from an out of state location, due to work schedules.

Plaintiff to give notice.