Motion to Continue Trial
24CV001534: QUARSAFI vs TARGET CORPORATION 02/27/2026 Hearing on Motion to Continue Trial in Department 47
Tentative Ruling
NOTICE: If oral arguments are requested or appearances are required, the hearing may be conducted in person or remotely via ZoomGov [which includes telephonic and teleconferencing options]. No Court Call appearances will be permitted. If you choose to use Zoom you must use your first and last name on your ZoomGov account so the court can positively identify you. The Department 47 ZoomLink is https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept47 and the ZoomGov ID is: 16173813009. Appearances via videoconference using the above link are preferred. To appear on ZoomGov by phone, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the ZoomGov ID referenced above, available phone commands include *6 to mute/unmute or *9 to raise your hand. If you experience issues joining your hearing, please contact the clerk in Department 47 at (916) 874-5487 for assistance.
Defendant Target Corporations (Defendant) to continue trial is UNOPPOSED and GRANTED as follows.
This is a personal injury (premises liability) action. On April 10, 2025, the parties were notified that trial is scheduled for May 5, 2026.
On December 17, 2025, defense counsel contacted the Court to reserve a hearing date for a motion for summary judgment. (Decl. of Christoper J. Clark ISO Mot. (Clark Decl. ¶ 17.) June 4, 2026, was the earliest date available due to the Courts impacted calendar. (Clark Decl. ¶ 3.) On January 7, 2026, Defendant served Plaintiff with its motion for summary judgment by mail and electronic transmission.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, a motion for summary judgment must be heard 30 days before trial and must be filed and served to provide opposing parties 81 days notice of the hearing date, plus additional notice depending on the method of service (five calendar days for mail, two court days for electronic transmission). 81 days notice plus 2 court days notice for electronic transmission would have required a hearing date on the summary judgment motion no earlier than April 1, 2026. Such a hearing date would have satisfied section 437cs requirement that a summary judgment motion be heard 30 days before trial. However, the Courts impacted calendar prevented the motion from being scheduled before the current trial date.
24CV001534: QUARSAFI vs TARGET CORPORATION 02/27/2026 Hearing on Motion to Continue Trial in Department 47
Despite knowing that the first available hearing date for the summary judgment was after the trial date, Defendant did not move to advance or specially set the hearing date. Instead, Defendant now moves for a continuance of the trial date so that its motion for summary judgment may be heard before trial.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
The motion is unopposed.
To ensure the prompt disposition of civil cases, the dates assigned for a trial are firm. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule (CRC) 3.1332(a).) Although continuances of trial are disfavored, each request for a continuance must be considered on its own merits. (CRC 3.1332(c).) The court may grant a continuance only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring the continuance. (Ibid.) The general rule governing continuances set forth in section 9 [of the Standards of Judicial Administration] is that . . . the necessity for the continuance should have resulted from an emergency occurring after the trial setting conference that could not have been anticipated or avoided with reasonable diligence and cannot now be properly provided for other than by granting of a continuance. (Lazarus v. Titmus (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 1242, 1250.)
Here, the circumstances causing the request for a continuance of the trial date arose after trial was scheduled. Moreover, [n]umerous Courts of Appeal have held that a trial court cannot refuse to consider a motion for summary judgment that is timely filed. (Cole v. Superior Court (2022) 87 Cal.App.5th 84, 88.)
Although the Court notes that Defendant failed to pursue available alternative remedies, which could have allowed the summary judgment motion to be heard before trial, the Court also acknowledges that its impacted calendar contributed to the problem Defendant faces.
For the stated reasons, the Court finds that good cause exists to continue the trial and mandatory settlement conference dates. Defendants motion is granted and the April 2, 2026 mandatory settlement conference and May 5, 2026 trial dates are vacated.
This case is referred to Trial Setting Process for selection of trial and mandatory settlement conference dates. All counsel shall confer and agree upon new trial and settlement conference dates. Available dates can be obtained on the Courts web site at http://www.saccourt.ca.gov. Plaintiffs counsel must notify the court of the selection of mandatory settlement conference and trial dates no later than 60 days after February 27, 2026, by completing the request form at http://www.saccourt.ca.gov/civil/trial-setting.aspx. If the parties have not agreed on dates before the 60th day, court staff shall assign mandatory settlement
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
24CV001534: QUARSAFI vs TARGET CORPORATION 02/27/2026 Hearing on Motion to Continue Trial in Department 47
conference and trial dates that are next available (after the hearing on the motion for summary judgment), unless an extension of time has been granted by the appropriate Case Management Program Judge.
This case has been assigned to Department 47 for hearing. In the event that either party requests a hearing the matter will be heard at 9:30 a.m. in Department 47. Any party requesting an oral argument must contact the clerk at (916) 874-5487 and opposing counsel or parties in pro per by 12:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing. If a proper request for hearing is not made, this shall become the order of the Court.
Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government Code section 68086 and California Rules of Court, rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp- 13.Pdf A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Courts Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list, Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk.
If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will forward the form to the Court Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.