This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 05/27/2019 at 03:27:54 (UTC).

JENNIFER PRESSLEY VS JASMINE N FRANK

Case Summary

On 11/30/2017 JENNIFER PRESSLEY filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against JASMINE N FRANK. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is LAURA A. SEIGLE. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****5333

  • Filing Date:

    11/30/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

LAURA A. SEIGLE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

PRESSLEY JENNIFER

Defendants and Respondents

DOES 1 TO 10

FRANK JASMINE N.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

FARZAM JOSEPH S. ESQ.

 

Court Documents

Proof of Personal Service

4/19/2019: Proof of Personal Service

Minute Order

5/16/2019: Minute Order

SUMMONS

11/30/2017: SUMMONS

COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

11/30/2017: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/16/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 4B, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/16/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/19/2019
  • Proof of Personal Service; Filed by JENNIFER PRESSLEY (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/30/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/30/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by JENNIFER PRESSLEY (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/30/2017
  • COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC685333    Hearing Date: November 07, 2019    Dept: 4B

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

On November 30, 2017, plaintiff Jennifer Pressley (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Jasmine N. Frank in connection with an automobile collision that occurred on December 3, 2015. Defendant was served on April 18, 2019 and filed an answer on June 19, 2019. In her moving papers filed on October 9, 2019, Defendant requested a trial continuance from November 22, 2019 to February 12, 2021. On October 21, 2019, the Court continued the trial to February 28, 2020. The Court now considers whether an additional continuance of trial to February 12, 2021 is appropriate.

A party seeking a continuance of the date set for trial must make the request for a continuance by a noticed motion or an ex parte application as soon as reasonably practical once the necessity for the continuance is discovered. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1332(b).) The request for continuance may be granted on an affirmative showing of good cause. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1332.)

Defendant moves for a trial continuance because she is on active military duty and claims she is unavailable to attend a deposition or provide discovery responses. On September 12, 2019, Defendant informed her attorney that she is in the military. A letter from Defendant’s commanding officer states that Defendant is attached to and serving onboard Naval Medical Center San Diego in a Limited Duty status. The letter states that Defendant’s end of active obligated service is December 13, 2020.

This case was filed on November 30, 2017. Continuing the case to February 2021 would make this case more than three years old before trial begins. Defendant does not state what days of the week she works, what days of the week she has off of work, and why she cannot participate in discovery and the litigation of this case from her duty in San Diego. Defendant does not state whether she can get leave to attend a deposition and trial. The letter from her commanding officer does not set forth facts stating the manner in which her current military duty requirements materially affect her ability to appear or that her current military duty prevents her appearance and that military leave is not authorized for her. (50 U.S.C. App. § 522(b)(2).)

Defendant had not shown good cause exists for such a long trial continuance. Defendant’s motion is DENIED without prejudice.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT4B@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.