Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 22STCV22452, Date: 2024-09-03 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV22452 Hearing Date: September 3, 2024 Dept: 29
Babasi v. Albert’s Transport
22STCV22452
Plaintiff’s Motion for Relief from Waiver of Jury Trial
Tentative
The motion is granted.
Background
On July 12, 2022, Bilet Babasi (“Plaintiff”) filed a
complaint against Albert’s Transport, Inc. (“Albert’s”) and Serge G. Belinga (“Belinga”)
for motor vehicle negligence and general negligence arising out of an
automobile accident occurring on July 20, 2020.
On December 9, 2022, Albert’s filed an answer. On June
30, 2023, Belinga filed an answer.
On August 24, 2023, Plaintiff filed notice of posting
jury fees. On August 2, 2024, Plaintiff filed a demand for jury trial.
On August 7, 2024, Plaintiff filed this motion for an
order granting relief from potential waiver of trial by jury. No opposition has
been filed.
Legal Standard
“Trial by jury is an
inviolate right and shall be secured to all.” (Cal. Const., art. I, § 16.) “In
a civil cause a jury may be waived by the consent of the parties expressed as
prescribed by statute.” (Ibid.)
Code of Civil Procedure
section 631 is the primary statute addressing waiver of a jury trial in a civil
case. Under section 631, subdivision(f)(5), a party waives their right to a
jury trial by not timely posting jury fees. Jury fees must be paid “on or before
the date scheduled for the initial case management conference in the action”;
where there is no case management conference, the fees are due “no later than
365 calendar days after the filing of the initial complaint.” (Code Civ. Proc.,
§ 631, subd. (c) & (c)(2).)
“The court may, in its
discretion upon just terms, allow a trial by jury although there may have been
a waiver of a trial by jury.” (Id., subd. (g).)
The California Supreme
Court recently addressed the exercise of this discretion in TriCoast
Builders, Inc. v. Fonnegra (2024) 15 Cal.5th 766. In ruling on a request
for relief from waiver of jury trial:
“[T]he primary
consideration is … whether granting relief from waiver would result in any
hardship to other parties or to the court, such as delay in rescheduling the
trial for a jury or inconvenience to witnesses. But courts have also regularly
considered other factors, including the timeliness of the request; whether the
requester is willing to comply with applicable requirements for payment of jury
fees; and the reasons supporting the request.” (15 Cal.5th at pp. 779-780.)
“[T]he presence or absence
of hardship is not always dispositive,” and the court may, in its discretion,
also consider (among other things) whether the motion for relief from waiver
“simply reflects a belated change of heart about trial tactics” or is being
used as a “pretext” to obtain a continuance. (Id., at p. 780.) But when
a party “has timely given notice that it desires trial by jury” but then loses
that right by nonpayment of fees, “lack of hardship to the other parties or the
court is generally controlling, absent other factors that weigh against
relief.” (Id., at p. 782.)
In ruling on request from
relief from waiver under section 631, subdivision (g), “courts are mindful of
the requirement ‘to resolve doubts in interpreting the waiver provisions of
section 631 in favor of a litigant's right to jury trial.’” (Tesoro del
Valle Master Homeowners Assn. v. Griffin (2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 619, 638, quoting
Grafton Partners v. Superior Court (2005) 36 Cal.4th 944, 956.)
Discussion
Plaintiff’s counsel
contends they inadvertently failed to timely make a demand for a jury trial. (Olano
Decl., ¶ 3.) Plaintiff untimely posted jury fees on August 24, 2023; there is
no indication that this was a deliberate tactical decision, that Plaintiff is
having a belated change of heart, or that this is a pretext for a continuance.
Inadvertence is a factor that weighs in support of granting the motion.
Although the presence or
absence of prejudice is not independently dispositive, the Court notes that no
opposition has been filed. Plaintiff contends there is no prejudice as the parties
have been preparing for a jury trial, and Defense counsel indicated they would
not oppose this motion. (Id., ¶¶ 3, 4.)
The Court finds that
Plaintiff did not timely post jury fees or demand a jury trial; that in doing
so, Plaintiff
waived the right to jury trial; that this waiver was inadvertent; and that no
party would suffer any undue or unfair prejudice from a court order granting
relief from waiver.
After considering all of
the evidence in the record, the Court exercises its discretion under Code of
Civil Procedure section 631, subdivision (g), to grant relief from waiver and
to allow a trial by jury.
Conclusion
The Court
GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for relief from waiver of jury trial.
Moving party is ORDERED to give notice.