Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 21STCV02826, Date: 2024-01-17 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV02826 Hearing Date: January 17, 2024 Dept: 29
Motion to Continue Trial Date, filed by Plaintiff Heather Vanian.
Tentative
The motion is GRANTED.
Background
On January 22, 2021, Plaintiff Heather Vanian (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Jonathan A. Hoenig, M.D., Jonathan Hoenig, M.D. Surgery Center, LLC, and Does 1 through 50, asserting the cause of action for Negligence, medical, from surgery occurring on November 20, 2019.
On December 14, 2023, Plaintiff filed this motion to continue the trial. No opposition has been filed.
Legal Standard
Code Civ. Proc. § 128(a)(8) provides that the court has the power to amend and control its process and orders so as to make them conform to law and justice. “The power to determine when a continuance should be granted is within the discretion of the trial court.” (Color-Vue, Inc. v. Abrams (1996) 44 Cal.App.4th 1599, 1603.) “A trial court has wide latitude in the matter of calendar control including the granting or denying of continuances.” (Park Motors, Inc. v. Cozens (1975) 49 Cal.App.3d 12, 18.)
Each request for a continuance must be considered on its own merits according to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1332(c). The court may grant a continuance only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring the continuance. Circumstances of good cause include:
“(1) The unavailability of an essential lay or expert witness because of death, illness, or other excusable circumstances;
(2) The unavailability of a party because of death, illness, or other excusable circumstances;
(3) The unavailability of trial counsel because of death, illness, or other excusable circumstances;
(4) The substitution of trial counsel, but only where there is an affirmative showing that the substitution is required in the interests of justice;
(5) The addition of a new party if: (A) The new party has not had a reasonable opportunity to conduct discovery and prepare for trial; or (B) The other parties have not had a reasonable opportunity to conduct discovery and prepare for trial in regard to the new party's involvement in the case;
(6) A party's excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts; or
(7) A significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for trial.”
(Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1332(c).)
California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1332 sets forth a list of non-exhaustive factors to be analyzed when determining whether good cause for a trial continuance is present. A court considers factors such as:
“(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.”
(Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1332(d).)
Discussion
Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed to the trial continuance, as a stipulation signed by the parties is attached as Exhibit 1.
Plaintiff has had multiple surgeries, and is scheduled for at least one more procedure in the upcoming months. (Hoffman Decl., ¶ 3.) Plaintiff contends she will be healed and ready to try her case in late 2024. (Id.) Plaintiff is paying for surgeries out her pocket and has incurred expenses in six figures to address her injuries. (Id.) Trial is current scheduled for May 8, 2024. (Motion, 5:13.)
No opposition has been filed.
The Court finds that Plaintiff has made a showing of good cause to continue the trial date to give Plaintiff adequate time to complete her medical procedures and recover from her surgery.
Based on the agreement of the parties, and for good cause shown, Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue is GRANTED.
Conclusion
The Motion to Continue is GRANTED.
The date of trial is advanced and continued to approximately January 20, 2025. The Final Status Conference and all deadlines are reset based on the new trial date.
Final Status Conference is continued to 01/14/2025 at 10:00 AM in Department 29 at Spring
Street Courthouse. Jury Trial is continued to 01/28/2025 at 08:30 AM in Department 29 at
Spring Street Courthouse.
Moving Party is ORDERED to give notice.