Judge Theresa M. Traber, Case Number: 23STCV29592, Date: 2024-04-10 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 23STCV29592, Date: 2024-04-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV29592 Hearing Date: April 10, 2024 Dept: 47

Tentative Ruling

Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47

HEARING DATE: April 10, 2024 TRIAL DATE: NOT SET

CASE: Richard Williams v. Philips North America, LLC, et al.

CASE NO.: 23STCV29592

MOTION FOR TRIAL PREFERENCE

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Richard Williams

RESPONDING PARTY(S): Defendants Philips North America, LLC; Philips Medical Systems (Cleveland), Inc.; Philips Holding USA Inc.; Philips RS North America LLC; and Respironics California, LLC

CASE HISTORY:

· 12/04/23: Complaint filed.

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

This is an employment discrimination action that was filed on December 4, 2023. Plaintiff alleges that he was denied accommodations and wrongfully terminated for taking medical leave for cancer treatment.

Plaintiff moves to specially set this matter for trial pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 36(d).

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff’s Motion for Trial Preference is GRANTED.

Trial in this matter is specially set for Monday, July 29, 2024, at 10:00 AM.

The Court specially sets a Hearing on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment or Adjudication for Friday, July 12, 2024 at 9:00 AM. All papers relating to any motion for summary judgment or adjudication that is to be heard on this date must be served and filed per code.

DISCUSSION:

Plaintiff moves to specially set this matter for trial pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 36(d).

Subdivision (d) of section 36 of the Code of Civil Procedure states that the Court, in its discretion, may grant a motion for preference “that is accompanied by clear and convincing medical documentation that concludes that one of the parties suffers from an illness or condition raising substantial medical doubt of survival of that party beyond six months, and that satisfies the court that the interests of justice will be served by granting the preference.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 36(d).) If the motion is granted, the Court “shall set the matter for trial not more than 120 days from that date.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 36(f).)

Plaintiff states that he was diagnosed with prostate cancer in August 2021, began treatment shortly thereafter, and is suffering from Stage IV metastatic cancer. (Declaration of Richard Williams ISO Mot. ¶ 2-3.) Plaintiff’s counsel engaged Dr. Albert Dekker, a practicing oncologist and Adjunct Assistant Professor of Oncology at the University of Southern California, to render an independent opinion on the probability of Plaintiff’s survival beyond six months. (Declaration of Albert Dekker ISO Mot. ¶¶ 2-3, Exh. A.) In formulating his opinion, Dr. Dekker reviewed Plaintiff’s treatment records from the period between October 2020 and February 2024, and conferred with Plaintiff and his spouse on February 28, 2024. (Dekker Decl. ¶3; Exh. F.) Dr. Dekker states that Plaintiff’s cancer was discovered in August 2021 and thereafter diagnosed as very advanced and widespread metastatic prostate cancer of a form that is unusually aggressive and not well-documented. (Dekker Decl. ¶¶ 5-6; Plaintiff’s Exh. B. p. 471.) Treatment commenced immediately via hormone deprivation therapy with chemotherapy added in September 2021 and continued with three breaks until the last record in Dr. Dekker’s possession. (Dekker Decl. ¶ 7 Exh. B. p.471.) Dr. Dekker states that these measures were consistent with the standard of care, but that the best cancer control was achieved in March 2022, seven months later, after which the disease began progressing. (Dekker Decl. ¶ 8.) Dr. Dekker opines that this is a short interval by the standards of prostate cancer. (Id.)

According to Dr. Dekker, Plaintiff has experienced severe pain and complications from treatment throughout 2023. (Dekker Decl. ¶¶ 9-11, Exh. B. pp. 26-27, 43, 106-110, 135.) Dr. Dekker declares that, as of February 2024, Plaintiff’s cancer is out of control and progressing extremely rapidly. (Dekker Decl. ¶ 12.) Plaintiff stopped chemotherapy in February 2024 and has been referred for palliative care and novel radiation therapy. (Id; Plaintiff’s Exhs. E-F.) Dr. Dekker opines that, based on the biology of Plaintiff’s cancer, his poor previous response to hormonal therapy and chemotherapy, his symptoms, and the pace of his disease progression, Plaintiff is unlikely to survive beyond six months to a reasonable degree of medical certainty. (Dekker Decl. ¶ 15.)

The Court is satisfied by the showing produced by Plaintiff and his expert, Dr. Dekker, that Plaintiff suffers from a medical condition that raises a substantial medical doubt of survival beyond six months. Moreover, the Court finds that the interests of justice will be served by granting preference to permit Plaintiff his day in court because the illness from which Plaintiff suffers is also the express basis for the claims asserted against Defendants. (Complaint ¶¶ 16-22.) The Court therefore finds that Plaintiff is entitled to an order specially setting this matter for trial pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 36(d).

Defendants do not oppose trial preference, but request that the Court set the matter for trial the maximum 120 days after the hearing and permit the Defendants to have their planned Motion for Summary Judgment heard less than 30 days before trial. Plaintiff does not object to either request so long as Plaintiff receives the full 75-day notice period for any motion for summary judgment or adjudication. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(a)(2).)

Although the Court’s calendar precludes fully granting Defendants’ request to set trial 120 days from this hearing, the Court will accommodate Defendants to the extent possible by specially setting trial for Monday, July 29, 2024, at 10:00 AM. The Court will also specially set a hearing on a Motion for Summary Judgment or Adjudication on Friday, July 12, 2024, at 9:00 AM. This date will permit Defendants to have their prospective motion heard less than 30 days before trial while also ensuring all papers can be served with sufficient notice as required by section 437c(a)(2).

CONCLUSION:

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion for Trial Preference is GRANTED.

Trial in this matter is specially set for Monday, July 29, 2024, at 10:00 AM.

The Court specially sets a Hearing on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment or Adjudication for Friday, July 12, 2024, at 9:00 AM. All papers relating to any motion for summary judgment or adjudication that is to be heard this date must be served and filed per code.

Moving Party to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 10, 2024 ___________________________________

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.