This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/13/2019 at 02:45:22 (UTC).

PACIFIC CLINICS VS RENT-A-CENTER INC

Case Summary

On 03/15/2018 a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury case was filed by PACIFIC CLINICS against RENT-A-CENTER INC in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****8134

  • Filing Date:

    03/15/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

PACIFIC CLINICS

Defendants and Respondents

RENT-A-CENTER INC.

DOES 1 TO 50

RAC NATIONAL PRODUCT SERVICE LLC

 

Court Documents

SUMMONS

3/15/2018: SUMMONS

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

3/15/2018: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/12/2019
  • [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Personal Injury Courts Only (Central District); Filed by RAC National Product Service, LLC [Doe 1] (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/30/2019
  • Request for Dismissal; Filed by Pacific Clinics (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2019
  • Answer (RAC National Product Services, LLC"s Answer to Unverified Complaint); Filed by RAC National Product Service, LLC [Doe 1] (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/11/2018
  • Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name); Filed by Pacific Clinics (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/22/2018
  • Proof of Service by Mail; Filed by Rent-A-Center, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/22/2018
  • PROOF OF SERVICE BY U.S. MAIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/09/2018
  • DEFENDANT RENT-A-CENTER, INC.'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/09/2018
  • Receipt; Filed by Rent-A-Center, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/09/2018
  • CIVIL DEPOSIT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/09/2018
  • Answer; Filed by Rent-A-Center, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2018
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Pacific Clinics (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2018
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2018
  • COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2018
  • Complaint; Filed by Pacific Clinics (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2018
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC698134    Hearing Date: February 20, 2020    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

PACIFIC CLINICS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

RENT-A-CENTER, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

))

Case No.: BC698134

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE THE TRIAL DATE

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

February 20, 2020

On December 11, 2018, Plaintiff filed an amendment to complaint, substituting in RAC National Product Service, LLC for Doe 1.

On May 1, 2019, dismissal was entered as to Defendant Rent-A-Center, Inc.

On June 12, 2019, pursuant to a stipulation and order, the trial was continued from September 16, 2019 to December 16, 2019.  On September 19, 2019, pursuant to a second stipulation and order, the trial was continued from December 16, 2019 to March 19, 2020.

The parties now jointly seek a continuance of the March 19, 2020 trial date to October 15, 2020, or a date thereafter convenient for the court.

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.)

The parties argue there is good cause to continue the trial date because Defendant RAC recently substituted in new counsel and the continuance would allow RAC’s new counsel time to fully evaluate the case for trial or potential settlement.  The parties further argue that Plaintiff is seeking reimbursement under Labor Code section 3852 for workers’ compensation benefits paid on behalf of its employee and that the requested continuance will provide additional time for the final determination of Plaintiff’s employee’s underlying workers’ compensation claim.

The Court finds there is good cause to continue the trial date to allow time for RAC’s new counsel to evaluate this action and for final determination of Plaintiff’s employee’s underlying workers’ compensation claim.  Additionally, despite a lack of request for such, the Court finds that it is in the interest of justice to continue all trial-related dates.

Accordingly, the Joint Motion to Continue the Trial Date is GRANTED. The Court orders trial continued from March 19, 2020 to October 15, 2020, at 8:30 a.m., in Department 31. The Final Status Conference is continued from March 5, 2020 to September 30, 2020, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 31. Discovery cut-off (including expert witness exchange) and motion cut-off dates shall be based on the new trial date. 

Defendant to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.orgIf the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar.