Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 22STCV08821, Date: 2023-08-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV08821    Hearing Date: August 24, 2023    Dept: 29

TENTATIVE

Defendants’ Motion to Continue Trial is GRANTED.

Background

This action stems from an alleged battery against Marlene McHammel (“Plaintiff”) while visiting Liaison Restaurant. While there on June 26, 2021, Plaintiff alleges she was physically attacked by Jenna Ashouri, Joana Ashouri, and other individuals (“Does”), and beaten until she lost consciousness. (Complaint, ¶ 10-12.) Plaintiff filed her initial Complaint on March 11, 2022. Plaintiff now files the instant Motion to Continue Trial (“Motion”). 

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).)¿¿¿

The court may also consider the following factors: “(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 3.1332(d).)¿¿ ¿

Discussion

The Court finds good cause for the requested continuance. Plaintiff reports that she is experiencing severe difficulties in serving defendants, despite her diligence. Plaintiff states that she has made 15 separate attempts at serving Defendants Jenna and Joana Ashouri in the past year, but she has been unsuccessful. Plaintiff states that she has submitted an application for publication. Additionally, Plaintiff contends that she is proceeding with default proceedings against the other defendants in the case, Liaison and PB.

Conclusion

The Court GRANTS the request to continue trial. Trial is continued to mid March 2024. Final Status Conference and all deadlines are reset based on new trial date.

 
Final Status Conference is continued to 03/01/2024 at 10:00 AM in Department 29 at Spring
Street Courthouse. Non-Jury Trial is continued to 03/15/2024 at 08:30 AM in Department 29 at
Spring Street Courthouse

Moving party is ordered to give notice.