Case Number: BC620715 Hearing Date: November 28, 2018 Dept: 4

The court considered the motion papers.

Background

On May 17, 2016, plaintiff Beatriz West filed a complaint against defendants Nader Hattar, Dema Hattar, Hattar Family Trust (collectively, “Hattars”), City of Los Angeles (“City”), County of Los Angeles (“County”), and State of California (“State”) for negligence and premises liability based on a trip and fall on August 5, 2015, on the sidewalk of White Oak Avenue.

On December 2, 2016, the County and the State were dismissed. On January 25, 2018, the Court granted Hattars’ motion for summary judgment.

On June 27, 2018, City filed its cross-complaint against cross-defendant Northridge Estates Homeowner Association for indemnification, apportionment of fault, declaratory relief, negligence and premises liability.

The trial date is set for January 30, 2019.

Legal Standard

Pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1332(a), “[t]o ensure the prompt disposition of civil cases, the dates assigned for a trial are firm. All parties and their counsel must regard the date set for trial as certain.” Under CRC Rule 3.1332(b), “[a] party seeking a continuance of the date set for trial, whether contested or uncontested or stipulated to by the parties, must make the request for a continuance by a noticed motion or an ex parte application under the rules in chapter 4 of this division, with supporting declarations. The party must make the motion or application as soon as reasonably practical once the necessity for the continuance is discovered.”

Under CRC Rule 3.1332(c), “[a]lthough continuances of trials are disfavored, each request for a continuance must be considered on its own merits. The court may grant a continuance only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring the continuance.” CRC Rule 3.1332(d) sets forth other factors that are relevant in determining whether to grant a continuance.

Discussion

Cross-Defendant Northridge Estates Homeowner Association (“Association”) requests that the court continue the current trial date, along with all related cut-offs and deadlines including those for discovery, expert discovery, and designation of expert witnesses, for six to nine months.

Association advises that it answered the cross-complaint in August 2018, and that trial should be continued because it has been added late in this action with no prior opportunity to participate in discovery. Association has propounded discovery, with no responses yet received. Association will need to take depositions and file a Motion for Summary Judgment, on the grounds that it never owned, maintained, or controlled the L.A. City sidewalk where plaintiff tripped and fell. No party has provided any responsive documents after Association served a Demand for Prior Pleadings and Discovery.

The motion is GRANTED because Association has shown good cause. CRC Rule 3.1332.

The court orders the trial date continued from January 30, 2018 to __________________, at 8:30 a.m., in Department 4. The Final Status Conference is continued from January 19, 2018 to __________________, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 4. Discovery cut-off and motion cut-off dates shall be based on the new trial date.

Moving Cross-Defendant is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 28, 2018

_____________________________

Christopher Lui

Judge of the Superior Court