Padda v. Superior Court (2018) 25 Cal.App.5th 25

With trial less than two weeks away in this business dispute between physicians and a medical group, GMSR’s clients learned that a key expert witness had become seriously ill, required immediate surgery, and would be unavailable to testify for at least six weeks.  When the trial court denied their motion to continue the trial despite their opponents’ agreement that a continuance was necessary, GMSR filed a writ petition challenging the denial and seeking an immediate stay.  The Court of Appeal immediately granted a stay, and several weeks later filed a full opinion granting a peremptory writ of mandate that required the trial court to continue the trial.  It found that the denial was an abuse of discretion, among other reasons because the need to find a replacement expert on the eve imposed an untenable burden on the ability of GMSR’s clients to present their case.

Case Briefs