Chloe Ran Ran Yang v. GHP Management Corporation, et al.

Case Number: 23CHCV03059 DEFENDANTS GHP MANAGEMENT CORPORATION AND SAUGUS COLONY LIMITED'S MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, ADVANCE THE HEARING ON THEIR MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/ADJUDICATION Motion filed on June 10, 2026. MOVING PARTIES: Defendants GHP Management Corporation and Saugus Colony Limited RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Chloe Ran Ran Yang NOTICE: OK. RELIEF REQUESTED: An order continuing trial and related dates to permit Defendants' January 7, 2027 MSJ to be heard before trial or, alternatively, advancing the MSJ hearing to a date between November 15 and December 18, 2026. RULING: Granted in part. The alternative request to advance the hearing on the motion for summary judgment/adjudication is granted. The request to continue trial and related dates is denied as unnecessary.

BACKGROUND On October 11, 2023, Plaintiff Chloe Ran Ran Yang (Plaintiff) filed the Complaint alleging negligence and premises liability arising from an alleged dog bite at an apartment owned or managed by Defendants GHP Management Corporation and Saugus Colony Limited (Defendants). Trial is currently scheduled for January 19, 2027.

On May 2, 2026, Defendants filed their motion for summary judgment/adjudication (MSJ). Defendants reserved January 7, 2027, which counsel states was the first available hearing date through the Court Reservation System. The hearing is within 30 days of the current trial date. (Karayan Decl. P.P. 6, 8-10.)

On June 10, 2026, Defendants filed the present motion to continue trial or, alternatively, advance the MSJ hearing. Plaintiff opposed on August 13, 2026. Defendants replied on August 14, 2026.

DISCUSSION Notice of a motion for summary judgment and supporting papers must be served at least 81 days before the hearing. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 437c, subd. (a)(2).) The motion must be heard no later than 30 days before trial unless the court for good cause orders otherwise. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 437c, subd. (a)(3).) Opposition must be served and filed not less than 20 days before the hearing, and reply papers not less than 11 days before the hearing. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 437c, subd. (b)(2), (4).)

Trial dates are firm, and continuances are disfavored. A continuance may be granted only upon an affirmative showing of good cause. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subds. (a), (c).) In determining whether a continuance is warranted, the Court considers all relevant circumstances, including the availability of alternative means to address the problem, prejudice to the parties, the Court's calendar, and whether the interests of justice favor a continuance. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subds. (d)(4), (5), (7), (10).)

A trial court may not refuse to hear a summary judgment motion filed within the time limits of Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, and local rules and practices may not be applied so as to prevent its filing and hearing. (Sentry Insurance Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 526, 529.)

Here, Defendants filed and served their MSJ on May 2, 2026, well before the applicable filing deadline. Counsel states that January 7, 2027 was the first available hearing date in the Court Reservation System. (Karayan Decl. P.P. 8-11.) Because that date falls within 30 days of the January 19, 2027 trial, Defendants seek either a trial continuance or an earlier MSJ hearing.

Plaintiff argues that Defendants lacked diligence because they knew of the scheduling issue when the MSJ was filed, waited approximately five weeks before seeking relief, and did not proceed ex parte. The Court finds that the delay does not warrant denial of relief. The MSJ itself was timely filed and served, Defendants sought relief well before trial, and the scheduling issue can be resolved without disturbing the existing trial date.

The Court can accommodate the MSJ on November 24, 2026. That date permits the motion to be heard more than 30 days before trial and preserves the statutory notice and briefing periods under section 437c. Plaintiff therefore retains the full statutory period to prepare and file her opposition.

CONCLUSION Defendants GHP Management Corporation and Saugus Colony Limited's Motion to Continue Trial or, in the Alternative, Advance the Hearing on Their Motion for Summary Judgment/Adjudication is GRANTED IN PART. The January 7, 2027 hearing on Defendants' motion for summary judgment/adjudication is advanced to November 24, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department F-46. The December 3, 2026 Mandatory Settlement Conference, January 8, 2027 Final Status Conference, and January 19, 2027 trial date remain on calendar. Defendants' request to continue trial and related dates is denied as unnecessary. Defendants shall give notice.

Case Number: 25CHCV04136 Hearing Date: August 26, 2026 Dept: F46 Dept. F-46 Hearing Date: August 26, 2026