On 03/21/2018 ARMANDO LOPEZ filed a Personal Injury - Other Product Liability lawsuit against GLOCKSTORE. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are CHRISTOPHER K. LUI and DANIEL M. CROWLEY. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
****9145
03/21/2018
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
CHRISTOPHER K. LUI
DANIEL M. CROWLEY
LOPEZ ARMANDO
GLOCKSTORE
LMP/MAIL ORDER VIDEO
MAGILLS LENNY
SAN DIEGO SWEING COMPANY
GLOCKSTORE LMP/MAIL ORDER VIDEO
DOES 1 TO 100
SAN DIEGO SWEING COMPANY A CORPORATION
SAN DIEGO SEWING COMPANY DBA GLOCKSTORE
LMP/MAIL ORDER VIDEO DBA GLOCKSTORE
MAGILLS INDIVIDUALLY LENNY
LENNY MAGILLS DBA GLOCKSTORE
LMP/MAIL ORDER VIDEO A CORPORATION
HERZOG IAN ESQ.
HERZOG IAN ISAAC
JOHNSON JERRI LYNN ESQ.
ERDREICH RYAN
MALSCH JEFFREY
JOHNSON JERRI LYNN
12/27/2019: Request for Refund / Order
6/24/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE; HEARING ON MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL)
6/1/2020: Motion to Vacate - MOTION TO VACATE MOTION TO VACATE TRIAL DATE AND SET TSC
1/14/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (DEFENDANT LMP/MAIL ORDER VIDEO, INC. DBA GLOCKSTORE'S EX PART...)
1/14/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL)
7/11/2019: [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC (AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES) PERSO
6/18/2019: Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER STIP & PROTECTIVE ORDER
1/22/2019: Demand for Jury Trial
2/19/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Application for Admission of Jeffrey Malsch and Ry...)
6/21/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -
6/21/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -
6/21/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -
6/21/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -
6/21/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -
7/13/2018: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL -
7/20/2018: Answer -
3/21/2018: CIVIL DEPOSIT -
3/21/2018: COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURIES AND PROPERTY DAMAGES 1. STRICT PRODUCT LIABILITY ;ETC
Hearing03/22/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 28 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal
Hearing02/24/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 28 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial
Hearing02/10/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department 28 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 28, Daniel M. Crowley, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court
Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 28, Daniel M. Crowley, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court
Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 28, Daniel M. Crowley, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Continue Trial - Held - Motion Granted
DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by LMP/Mail Order Video DBA Glockstore (Defendant)
DocketMinute Order ( (Final Status Conference; Hearing on Motion to Continue Trial)); Filed by Clerk
DocketMotion to Vacate (Motion to Vacate Trial Date and Set TSC); Filed by LMP/Mail Order Video DBA Glockstore (Defendant)
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 28, Daniel M. Crowley, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court
DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS
DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Armando Lopez (Plaintiff)
DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Armando Lopez (Plaintiff)
DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Armando Lopez (Plaintiff)
DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Armando Lopez (Plaintiff)
DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Armando Lopez (Plaintiff)
DocketCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURIES AND PROPERTY DAMAGES 1. STRICT PRODUCT LIABILITY ;ETC
DocketComplaint; Filed by Armando Lopez (Plaintiff)
DocketSUMMONS
DocketCIVIL DEPOSIT
Case Number: BC699145 Hearing Date: June 24, 2020 Dept: 28
Motion to Continue Trial and Related Dates
Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On March 21, 2018, Plaintiff Armando Lopez (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Glockstore, Lenny Magills, Lenny Magills dba Glockstore, LMP/Mail Order Video, LMP/Mail Order Video dba Glockstore, San Diego Sewing Company, and San Diego Sewing Company dba Glockstore. Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that strict product liability, negligence, and breach of express and implied warranties for a gun that negligently discharged and harmed Plaintiff on November 5, 2016.
On July 13, 2018, the Court dismissed Defendants Lenny Magills, San Diego Sewing Company, and San Diego Sewing Company dba Glockstore without prejudice.
On June 1, 2020, Defendant LMP/Mail Order Video, Inc. dba Glockstore filed a motion to continue trial pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332.
Trial is set for July 8, 2020.
PARTY’S REQUESTS
Defendant LMP/Mail Order Video, Inc. dba Glockstore (“Moving Defendant”) asks the Court to vacate trial and set a trial setting conference.
LEGAL STANDARD
Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (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 California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (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.”
California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (c) states that “[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.” California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (d) sets forth factors that are relevant in determining whether to grant a continuance.
California 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.)
DISCUSSION
Moving Defendant argues there is good cause to vacate trial and set a trial setting conference because there is outstanding ordinary and expert discovery. (Motion, pp. 6:17-7:3.)
The Court finds there is good cause to continue trial, but not good cause to vacate trial entirely. Moving Defendant has not established why trial should not simply be continued. Trial needs to be set in order to continue the progress of this action.
CONCLUSION
The motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
The Court orders trial shall be continued to January 14, 2021 at 8:30 a.m. The Court also orders the final status conference date shall be continued to January 5, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. Both hearings are to be held in Department 28 of the Spring Street Courthouse, 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012. All discovery cut-off dates shall relate to the January 14, 2020 trial date.
Moving Defendant is ordered to give notice of this ruling.