Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 22STCV09370, Date: 2023-10-16 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV09370 Hearing Date: October 16, 2023 Dept: 29
TENTATIVE
Defendant Sean Sooferian, D.D.S.’s Motion to Continue
Trial is GRANTED.
Background
The
instant case is one for dental malpractice. Jacquith Embray (“Plaintiff”) was a
dental patient of Pedram Sooferi, D.D.S. and Sean Sooferian, D.D.S. (collectively,
“Defendants”), when Plaintiff visited Defendants dental office on March 18,
2021. Plaintiff alleges that after two shots of lidocaine were administered,
Plaintiff blacked out and woke up in an ambulance. (Complaint, ¶ 13.)
Plaintiff
then filed the Complaint on March 16, 2022 alleging one cause of action for
professional negligence. Defendants filed their answers on September 7 and 19,
2023.
The
Motion to Continue Trial (“Motion”) was filed by Defendant Sean Sooferian,
D.D.S. on September 19, 2023. The Motion is unopposed.
Discussion
Defendant contends
that the Motion should be granted because he was not served until August 25,
2023, 18 months after the initial Complaint was filed, and just 5 months before
the currently scheduled trial on January 9, 2024. Defendant argues that in
addition to being recently served, there is a pressing need for discovery, the
absence of which would cause him to suffer severe prejudice.
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).)¿¿ ¿
Code of Civil
Procedure section 2024.050 allows a court to grant leave to complete discovery
proceedings.¿ In doing so, a court shall consider matters relevant to the leave
requested, including, but not limited to: (1) the necessity of the discovery,
(2) the diligence in seeking the discovery or discovery motion, (3) the
likelihood of interference with the trial calendar or prejudice to a party, and
(4) the length of time that has elapsed between previous trial dates.¿ (Code
Civ. Proc. § 2024.050.)¿
“Continuances
are granted only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring a
continuance.” (In re Marriage of Falcone &¿Fyke¿(2008) 164
Cal.App.4th 814, 823.)¿Ruling on trial continuances involves court discretion,
based upon all of the relevant facts and circumstances, the specific factors
enumerated in¿Rule¿3.1332,¿and all competing interests guided by the strong
public policy in favor of deciding cases on the merits. (Oliveros¿v. County
of Los Angeles¿(2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 1389, 1398-1399.)
Analysis
The current
trial date is set for January 9, 2024, with a discovery of fact discovery in
December 2023. Defendant appeared just last month and has made a sufficient
showing that he needs additional time to conduct discovery (and possibly move
for summary judgment) and that he would be prejudiced if he were not given a
fair opportunity to conduct discovery and prepare for trial. Plaintiff does not
oppose the motion, indicating that it does not appear that Plaintiff would be
prejudiced by a continuance.
Accordingly, the
Motion is granted.
Conclusion
Defendant Sean Sooferian, D.D.S.’s Motion to Continue
Trial is GRANTED.
Trial is continued to mid February 2025. Final Status Conference
and all deadlines are reset based on the new trial date.