This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 01/15/2020 at 04:57:03 (UTC).

MAXIMILIAN HARPER VS LAUREN CHU ET AL

Case Summary

On 03/14/2018 MAXIMILIAN HARPER filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against LAUREN CHU. 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:

    ****7854

  • Filing Date:

    03/14/2018

  • 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

HARPER MAXIMILIAN

Defendants and Respondents

DOES 1 TO 10

CHU LAUREN

CHU HING

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

LAW OFFICE OF SHIRLEE L. BLISS

Defendant Attorney

MARKARIAN LOUISA

 

Court Documents

[Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - STIPULATION AND ORDER [PROPOSED] ORDER AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC [AND RELATED MOTION/

12/4/2019: [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - STIPULATION AND ORDER [PROPOSED] ORDER AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC [AND RELATED MOTION/

[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

8/2/2019: [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

Demand for Jury Trial

6/21/2019: Demand for Jury Trial

Answer

6/21/2019: Answer

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

6/21/2019: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Proof of Personal Service

6/4/2019: Proof of Personal Service

SUMMONS -

3/14/2018: SUMMONS -

COMPLAINT-CONTRACT -

3/14/2018: COMPLAINT-CONTRACT -

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/15/2021
  • Hearing03/15/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 4A at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; : OSC RE Dismissal

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/20/2020
  • Hearing03/20/2020 at 08:30 AM in Department 4A at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/09/2020
  • Hearing03/09/2020 at 10:00 AM in Department 4A at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/02/2020
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/04/2019
  • Docket[Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Personal Injury Courts Only (Central District); Filed by Lauren Chu (Defendant); Hing Chu (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2019
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/28/2019
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/02/2019
  • Docket[Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Personal Injury Courts Only (Central District); Filed by Lauren Chu (Defendant); Hing Chu (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/21/2019
  • DocketDemand for Jury Trial; Filed by Lauren Chu (Defendant); Hing Chu (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/21/2019
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Lauren Chu (Defendant); Hing Chu (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/21/2019
  • DocketNotice of Posting of Jury Fees; Filed by Lauren Chu (Defendant); Hing Chu (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/04/2019
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Maximilian Harper (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/14/2018
  • DocketCOMPLAINT-CONTRACT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/14/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Maximilian Harper (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/14/2018
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC697854    Hearing Date: February 19, 2020    Dept: 28

Motion to Continue Trial and Related Dates

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

BACKGROUND

On March 14, 2018, Plaintiff Maximilian Harper (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Lauren Chu and Hing Chu (“Defendants”) alleging motor vehicle negligence for an incident that occurred on March 31, 2016.

On January 24, 2020, Defendants filed a motion to continue trial pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332.

Trial is set for March 20, 2020.

PARTIES’ REQUESTS

Defendants ask the Court to: (1) continue trial to September 22, 2020, (2) continue the final status conference to September 8, 2020, and (3) relate all discovery and motion deadlines to the September 22, 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

Defendants argue there is good cause to continue trial and the related dates because Defendants need to obtain Plaintiff’s overdue written discovery responses, depose Plaintiff, potentially depose experts, and potentially conduct an IME.  (Markarian Decl., ¶ 5.)

The Court finds there is good cause to continue trialPlaintiff has not responded to written discovery requests.  Defendants’ discovery plan is likely contingent upon these responses.  The Court notes that there are four scheduled motions to compel in this action.  As such, the Court finds Defendants are being diligent in seeking Plaintiff’s discovery responses.  The motion is, thus, properly granted.

CONCLUSION

The motion is GRANTED.

The Court orders trial shall be continued to September 22, 2020 at 8:30 a.m.  The Court also orders the final status conference date shall be continued to September 8, 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 September 22, 2020 trial date.

Defendants are ordered to give notice of this ruling.