Important Change to our 30-day Money Back Guarantee ************************************** Due to the increasing allegations of fraudulent purchase transactions involving documents specifically designated for the purposes of litigation in eviction and/or unlawful detainer proceedings, we have been forced into choosing whether to continue offering such documents at all to ANYONE, or to declare that they are NON-REFUNDABLE, and are no longer covered by the 30-day money-back guarantee. ************************************** Consequently we have decided that as of March 16, 2024 at 1:00 am, PDT any single document specifically listed in the Eviction Defense Collection is hereby NON-REFUNDABLE. To determine if one or more of your proposed documents are NON-REFUNDABLE you will need to review the list of single documents found within the description for the Eviction Defense Collection. ************************************** In the meantime, we will be updating the individual file listings for all such affected documents. ************************************** HOWEVER, YOU HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED!

Continuing a trial date in a California eviction case

by Stan Burman

Continuing a trial date in a California eviction case is the topic of this blog post.  

Continuing a trial date in a California eviction case that the moving party make a sufficient showing of good cause because the general rule in California is that continuing a trial date is disfavored, particularly in an eviction case.

However if the moving party can show good cause for a continuance it may be granted although the decision as to whether the continuance should be granted is up to the discretion of the judge hearing the motion.

I want to stress right now that any request for a continuance in an eviction case in California should be made by ex-parte application as eviction cases in California are normally scheduled for trial within 20 days of a request for a trial date.

Continuances of trial for evictions in California are governed by California Rule of Court 3.1332 and Code of Civil Procedure § 1170.5.

I also want to point out that some courts have a policy of granting a maximum continuance of 10 calendar days for an eviction trial unless very exceptional circumstances are shown.

A defendant requesting a continuance may be required to pay into court the rent that would have otherwise become due and payable for the period of the continuance if the court finds that a reasonable probability that the plaintiff will prevail in the action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 1170.5(c). 

If you are requesting a continuance you should do everything that you can to make a strong showing in your moving papers that the plaintiff cannot show a reasonable probability of prevailing in the action on the grounds that the eviction is retaliatory, the three-day notice is defective, the plaintiff has breached the warranty of habitability, etc.

California Rule of Court 3.1332(b) requires that a request for a continuance should be filed as soon as “reasonably practical” after the justification for the continuance is discovered. 

I need to emphasize that contacting the opposing party or their counsel and detailing the need for the continuance in an attempt to obtain their agreement to stipulate to a continuance is a good idea as some judges will consider whether or not the moving party attempted to obtain a stipulation before filing any request with the court.

Although trial continuances may be disfavored, each case must be considered on its own merits pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1332(c) which states in pertinent part that:

“The following circumstances may indicate the presence of good cause warranting a continuance:

unavailability of essential lay or expert witness because of death, illness or other excusable circumstances, California Rule of Court 3.1332(c)(1);

unavailability of a party because of death, illness or other excusable circumstances, California Rule of Court 3.1332(c)(2);

unavailability of trial counsel because of death, illness or other excusable circumstances, California Rule of Court 3.1332(c)(3);

substitution of trial counsel where there is an affirmative showing that the substitution is required in the interests of justice, California Rule of Court 3.1332(c)(4);

addition of a new party if the new party has not had a reasonable opportunity to conduct discovery or the other parties have not had an adequate opportunity to prepare for trial in regard to the new party, California Rule of Court 3.1332(c)(5)(A),(B);

a party’s inability to obtain essential testimony, documents or other material evidence despite diligent efforts, California Rule of Court 3.1332(c)(6), or

a significant unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for trial. California Rule of Court 3.1332(c)(7).”

The most common reasons for requesting a continuance in a California eviction case would most likely be the serious illness of a party or material witness, or the inability to obtain essential testimony, documents or other material evidence.

A trial court in California has great discretion in ruling on any request for a continuance but must also consider whether denying a request for a continuance will deny the moving party a fair hearing.

Attorneys or parties in California who would like to view a portion of a sample 15 page ex-parte application for a continuance of the trial date in California containing brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities, sample declaration, sample declaration of ex-parte notice and proposed order sold by the author can use the link shown below.

Sample Ex-Parte Application for Continuance of Trial Date for California Eviction by Stan Burman on Scribd

 


Attorneys or parties in California that would like more information on a California eviction document collection containing over 30 sample documents including a sample motion for continuance of a trial date sold by the author can use the link shown below.

https://legaldocspro.myshopify.com/products/california-eviction-litigation-document-collection

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale.

Do you want to use this article on your website, blog or e-zine? You can, as long as you include this blurb with it: “Stan Burman is the author of over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation and is the author of a free weekly legal newsletter. You can receive 10 free gifts just for subscribing. Just visit http://freeweeklylegalnewsletter.gr8.com/  for more information.

Follow Stan Burman on Twitter at:

https://twitter.com/legaldocspro

Follow Stan Burman on Google Plus at:

https://plus.google.com/+StanBurman

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

Back to Blog from LegalDocsPro