Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 22STCV06066, Date: 2023-08-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV06066    Hearing Date: November 1, 2023    Dept: 47

Tentative Ruling

Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47

HEARING DATE:     November 1, 2023                 TRIAL DATE: January 30, 2024

CASE:                         Scott Norlund, et al. v. Ken Sampson, et al.

CASE NO.:                 22STCV06066           

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

MOVING PARTY:               Defendants/Cross Complainants Ken Sampson; Dey Sampson, and The Boardroom MDR, LLC.

RESPONDING PARTY(S): No response on eCourt as of 10/30/23

CASE HISTORY:

·         02/17/22: Complaint filed.

·         08/15/23: Cross-Complaint filed.

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

            This is an action for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and conversion. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants misappropriated funds intended for the purchase of a 2008 Sea Ray 44 Sundancer boat.

Defendants and Cross-Complainants move for a trial continuance.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendants and Cross-Complainants move for a trial continuance.

“To ensure the prompt disposition of civil cases, the dates assigned for trial are firm. All parties and their counsel must regard the date set for trial as certain.” (Cal Rules of Court Rule 3.1332(a).) Therefore, “continuances of trials are disfavored.” (Cal Rules of Court Rule 3.1332(c).) 

Defendants and Cross-Complainants seek a trial continuance of unspecified length on the basis that they have been unable to complete a deposition of Plaintiffs in time to prepare a Motion for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication. Good cause for a continuance exists as a result of a party’s “excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts.” (Rule 3.1332(c)(6).) Here, however, Defendants and Cross-Complainants offer no evidence of their diligence beyond a conclusory statement by their counsel that he has “been in good-faith negotiations to complete discovery in this matter.” Such meager filings are not sufficient to demonstrate that a trial continuance is warranted.

            Accordingly, Defendants and Cross-Complainants’ Motion for Continuance of Trial is DENIED.

This ruling is without prejudice to a procedurally proper motion supported by evidence setting forth good cause for a continuance. 

            Moving Parties to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 1, 2023                               ___________________________________

                                                                                    Theresa M. Traber

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

            Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.