This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 05/25/2019 at 03:58:56 (UTC).

MARIA SUCHITE VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANS

Case Summary

On 01/24/2017 MARIA SUCHITE filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is CHRISTOPHER K. LUI. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****7599

  • Filing Date:

    01/24/2017

  • 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

CHRISTOPHER K. LUI

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

SUCHITE MARIA

Defendants and Respondents

DOES 1 TO 15

LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

MATUSEK HENRY JOHN II ESQ.

Defendant Attorney

GRAVES & KING LAW OFFICES OF

 

Court Documents

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

1/24/2017: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

SUMMONS

1/24/2017: SUMMONS

ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER (SUPERIOR COURT)

1/24/2017: ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER (SUPERIOR COURT)

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

3/6/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

4/6/2018: ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF SZU PET LU; AND DECLARATION OF FVEILNA ELTCHI

5/3/2018: EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF SZU PET LU; AND DECLARATION OF FVEILNA ELTCHI

Minute Order

5/3/2018: Minute Order

NOTICE OF RULING

5/4/2018: NOTICE OF RULING

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL;AND ETC.

5/8/2018: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL;AND ETC.

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

6/22/2018: MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

Minute Order

6/22/2018: Minute Order

NOTICE OF RULING

8/23/2018: NOTICE OF RULING

Motion to Continue Trial Date

2/27/2019: Motion to Continue Trial Date

Minute Order

3/25/2019: Minute Order

Notice of Ruling

3/26/2019: Notice of Ruling

3 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/06/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/26/2019
  • Notice of Ruling; Filed by Los Angeles County Metropolitan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2019
  • at 1:30 PM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Continue Trial - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Defendant Lo sAngeles County Metropolitan Transportation Auth...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/27/2019
  • Defendant Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Notice of Motion and Motion to Continue Trial; Filed by Los Angeles County Metropolitan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/23/2018
  • NOTICE OF RULING

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/22/2018
  • Notice of Ruling; Filed by Los Angeles County Metropolitan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/22/2018
  • at 1:30 PM in Department 4; Unknown Event Type - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/22/2018
  • Minute order entered: 2018-06-22 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
10 More Docket Entries
  • 05/03/2018
  • Ex-Parte Application; Filed by Defendant/Respondent

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/03/2018
  • Minute order entered: 2018-05-03 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/06/2018
  • ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/06/2018
  • Answer; Filed by Los Angeles County Metropolitan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/06/2018
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/06/2018
  • Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Maria Suchite (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2017
  • ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER (SUPERIOR COURT)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by Maria Suchite (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2017
  • COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC647599    Hearing Date: February 04, 2020    Dept: 28

Motion to Continue Trial and Related Dates

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On January 24, 2017, Plaintiff Maria Suchite (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendant Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“Defendant”).  The complaint alleges motor vehicle and general negligence for a failure to properly deploy a wheelchair ramp making Plaintiff fall backwards while in her wheelchair on January 21, 2016.

On January 7, 2020, Defendant filed a motion to continue trial pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332.

On January 22, 2020, the Court continued the hearing on Defendants motion to February 4, 2020.

Trial is set for March 2, 2020.

PARTYS REQUESTS

Defendant asks the Court to continue trial to July 27, 2020 and the final status conference to July 15, 2020, relating all discovery cut of dates to relate to the July 27, 2020 trial date.

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

Defendant argues there is good cause to continue trial because Defendant has to conduct discovery regarding Plaintiff’s knee surgery and the parties agreed to the continuance.  (Motion, p. 6:23-7:2.)  There have been three continuances in this matter.  (Dykes Decl., ¶ 4.)

The Court finds there is good cause to continue trial, but not for nearly five months.  Defendant does not present evidence showing Plaintiff’s knee surgery was so recent that Defendant has not been able to serve written discovery, conduct depositions, or retain experts to review Plaintiff’s medical documentation.  Accordingly, there is no evidence showing such a significant continuance has been requested.  This action has been pending for over three years.  There have been three continuances, all of which have been disfavored.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subd. (c).)  This continuance is similarly disfavored and is tailored according to the evidence presented to the Court.

CONCLUSION

The motion is GRANTED.

The Court orders trial shall be continued to May 18, 2020 at 8:30 a.m.  The Court also orders the final status conference date shall be continued to May 4, 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 May 18, 2020 trial date.

Defendant is ordered to give notice of this ruling.