How to Postpone/Continue Trial Date

Useful Rulings on Motion to Continue Trial

Recent Rulings on Motion to Continue Trial

WYMONT SERVICES, LTD. V. HANDAL & ASSOCIATES

The motion to continue trial, though technically moot, is hereby GRANTED. Trial is reset to 02/01/21 at 9:00 am. The Court notes that the COVID-19 crisis resulted in a vacating of the MSC set for late March and it was never reset. The Court will now, on its own motion, re-set the MSC for October 23, 2020 at 8:30 am. The motion to stay is advanced to 10/08/20 in this department (briefing by Code).

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

RACHEL WHITLOW VS DANIEL ALEXANDER LOPEZ GARCIA

On July 22, 2020, Defendants Lopez-Garcia, Mountainside, and Domino’s (collectively, “Defendants”) filed the instant motion to continue trial date and all related dates. Currently, trial is set for December 24, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

EVERARDO TORRES VS COMBE INCORPORATED, ET AL.

On July 22, 2020, Defendants Lopez-Garcia, Mountainside, and Domino’s (collectively, “Defendants”) filed the instant motion to continue trial date and all related dates. Currently, trial is set for December 24, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

SHOOK VS. REDLE

HEARING ON MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE FILED BY FRANK G. REDLE * TENTATIVE RULING: * Granted on condition that the new trial date is set for late February or early March, 2021. Appear to set dates.

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2020

DENISE MATHRE VS JAN JOHNSON ET AL.

The two Motions to Be Relieved as Counsel, and the Motion to Continue Trial are set for hearing on September 11, 2020 at 9:00 AM in Dept. 10C. Parties to appear. To conduct a remote appearance, follow the instructions below. There is a dedicated conference bridge lines for Dept. 10C. Call into dedicated conference bridge line at the time set for the hearing. To attend the remote hearing in Dept. 10C: Call into (209) 992-5590, then follow the prompts and use the Bridge # 6937 and Pin # 6822.

  • Hearing

    Sep 08, 2020

  • Judge Jayne Lee
  • County

    San Joaquin County, CA

DIEGO GONZALEZ VS RYAN MCCARTY

.: BC721858 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL Dept. 27 8:30 a.m. September 2, 2020 On September 17, 2018, plaintiff Diego Gonzalez filed this action against defendant Ryan McCarty arising from a September 16, 2016 motor vehicle accident. Trial is currently scheduled for September 15, 2020. The parties request that the Court continue the trial date to no earlier than March 15, 20201.

  • Hearing

    Sep 02, 2020

ANEL PEREZ VS. GALT JOINT UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT

Plaintiff's contention is that it was not reasonable or necessary for Defendant to have incurred the additional expense of personally serving its Motion for Summary Judgment, Motion to Continue Trial, Motion to Bifurcate Trial, and Notice of Deposition of Jorge Ramos. Defendant argues that service of these motions was within the time allowed by statute, and that it was reasonable and necessary to serve the motions, even though less-expensive methods of service might have been used. (Opp'n at 2.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 31, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

SANDRA BERNAL VS ARCONIC VALLEY ET AL

The motion to continue trial raising the issue of discovery was continued to April 28, 2020. On April 15, 2020, the motion to continue trial was continued to July 1, 2020, and trial was continued to October 20, 2020; the court did not rule that discovery was likewise continued. Accordingly, the deposition subpoena of April 22, 2020 was served on a date in which discovery had not been reopened or extended and thus outside of the discovery period. (CCP § 2024.020(a),(b).)

  • Hearing

    Aug 28, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

LOURDES VALLADARES VS GEICO INSURANCE

Having granted Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendant’s Motion to Continue Trial and Related Dates, to Compel Responses to Discovery, to Compel Plaintiff’s Deposition, and Request for Sanctions is PLACED OFF CALENDAR AS MOOT.

  • Hearing

    Aug 26, 2020

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

RACHAEL WENDEL ET AL VS MARIN MARQUEZ ET AL

Motion to Continue Trial and Related Dates Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. No opposing papers were filed. BACKGROUND On December 7, 2017, Plaintiffs Rachael Wendel and Timothy Wendel (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed a complaint against Defendants Styline Logistics, Inc., Styline Transportation, Inc., Styline Logistics, OFS Brands Inc., Star Trucking Inc. Lone, Lone Star Trucking Group, Inc., and Marin Marquez.

  • Hearing

    Aug 24, 2020

TIMOTHY MCADAM, ET AL. VS JAY DE MIRANDA, ET AL.

Weber Family Trust’s motion to continue trial is DENIED without prejudice.

  • Hearing

    Aug 24, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

TADLOCK VS. MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC

Motion #3: Motion to Continue Trial: Again, Defendant apparently is attempting to combine multiple motions in a single motion. This is improper. Moreover, the Court notes that the trial in this matter has already been continued to 05/10/21 and thus, the request to Continue Trial is DEEMED MOOT. Defendant to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Aug 20, 2020

DANIEL AGUIRRE VS RICARDO CHAIDEZ

Defendant’s motion to continue trial and all related dates is granted. The 10/6/20 trial date is continued to 4/12/21 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse. The 9/22/20 FSC is continued to 3/29/21 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 31. All discovery and expert cut-off dates are continued to reflect the new trial date. Defendant is ordered to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Aug 19, 2020

SHAHIN MELAMED VS LEON DAVID FRANCO

On January 15, 2019, the court continued the trial in this matter to September 24, 2019 pursuant to the request of Plaintiff On September 11, 2019, the court granted Defendant’s motion to continue trial only as to the requested trial dates. The court’s ruling indicated that a separate motion would be required to continue the discovery cut-off date. On November 25, 2019, Defendant again moved ex parte to continue trial.

  • Hearing

    Aug 19, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

DESIGN BUILT SYSTEMS, INC. AND ALEXEI SOROKINE, ET AL

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO CONTINUE ~ TRIAL AND ALL RELATED DATES AND DEADLINES [PLTF] DESIGN BUILT SYSTEMS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORP. [CRCO] DANIEL (3) OWENS RULING All parties are ordered to appear by Zoom for this proceeding at 9:00 am in Department B. Parties must comply with Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 1.111(3) to contest the tentative decision. Parties who request oral argument are required to appear remotely by ZOOM.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Judge

    JAMES T, CHOU

  • County

    Marin County, CA

SAMEER V. MORENO, ET AL.

Motions: Plaintiff’s motion to continue trial and stay proceedings Tentative Ruling: To grant the motion to continue trial. To continue trial to September 20, 2021, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 503; trial readiness to September 17, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., in Department 503; and the mandatory settlement conference to August 25, 2021, at 10:00 a.m. in Department 575. To deny the motion to stay the proceedings.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

MARY LUZ ARRENDONDO VS. T-BIRD RESTAURANT GROUP, ET AL

Further, although plaintiff included an "Application to Continue Trial" in her Response to the Motion for Summary Judgment, the Court cannot consider a Motion to Continue Trial unless it is properly filed, noticed, and served on opposing counsel. Finally, plaintiff includes no facts in her declaration which suggest that "essential facts to justify the opposition may exist." (Code of Civ. Proc. § 437c(h),) As such, the Court will not continue the M8] for the fifth time.

  • Hearing

    Aug 07, 2020

DEYSI ALVAREZ VS GLENDALE I MALL ASSOCIATES LP ET AL

Target's motion to continue trial is moot.

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2020

BYRD, ET AL. V. GEN. MOTORS, LLC, ET AL.

Defendant’s Motion to Continue Trial TENTATIVE RULING Parties to appear and argue the motion. If the motion is denied, the court intends to confirm the Trial Management Conference previously set for Aug. 7, 2020, but continue the Trial Calling Conference from Aug. 14, 2020, to Aug. 24, 2020, at 1:30 p.m. If the motion is granted, the court will vacate the future dates, unless any are needed for other purposes, and re-set them.

  • Hearing

    Aug 03, 2020

SERENA FERRARO VS GREGORY PHILIPOT

.: BC705572 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL Dept. 27 1:30 p.m. August 3, 2020 On May 8, 2018, plaintiff Serena Ferraro filed this action against defendant Gregory Philipot. Defendant seeks an order continuing trial and all trial-related dates to at least July 2021.

  • Hearing

    Aug 03, 2020

SAINT LUKES PASADENA, LLC VS. JASON K. BOUTROS, MD, INC.

to continue trial, and preparing the motion for summary judgment and responding to plaintiff’s motion.

  • Hearing

    Jul 31, 2020

TITIPHAN ART VUTIPRICHAR VS INSOMNIAC HOLDINGS, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

Motion to Continue Trial and Related Dates Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. No opposing papers were filed. BACKGROUND On February 26, 2019, Plaintiff Titiphan Art Vutiprichar (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Insomniac Holdings, LLC, Live Nation Entertainment, Inc., and National Orange Show (collectively “Defendants”).

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

SAMUEL HARRIS, JR VS NATHANIEL HAYWOOD, ET AL.

On July 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed a “Prosecutorial Malpractice Motion To Continue Trial Due To Defense Delay Letter Show Cause and Order To Explain Lateness – – Breach/Other Than Contract For Out Court Settlement Unfulfilled.”[1] Discussion Defendant VanNatter moves for dismissal pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 581.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

SAMUEL HARRIS, JR VS NATHANIEL HAYWOOD, ET AL.

On July 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed a “Prosecutorial Malpractice Motion To Continue Trial Due To Defense Delay Letter Show Cause and Order To Explain Lateness – – Breach/Other Than Contract For Out Court Settlement Unfulfilled.”[1] Discussion Defendant VanNatter moves for dismissal pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 581.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

TOMAS MORALES VS SANAZ FABRICS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

SUBJECT: Motion to Continue Trial Moving Party: Defendant Sanaz Fabrics Resp. Party: None The motion to continue trial is GRANTED. BACKGROUND: On June 6, 2006, Plaintiff Tomas Morales was hired by Defendant Sanaz Fabrics, Inc. as a full-time non-exempt manual labor and was terminated on June 14, 2017. Plaintiff alleges that he has not been paid the outstanding wages owed to him. (See Complaint, ¶¶ 16-29.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 197     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.