Oct 22, 2008
Summary judgment affirmed where trial court properly denied second continuance

Schulman v. Regents (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 8644 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two). [unpublished]. The plaintiff brought a medical malpractice action against GMSR’s client, the Regents of the University of California. After the Regents moved for summary judgment, the plaintiff sought two continuances for filing her opposition. The trial court granted her initial request, but denied the second and granted the Regents’ motion. In affirming, the Court of Appeal agreed with GMSR’s arguments that the inadequate appellate record plaintiff had provided made it impossible for her to show error, and that in any event the trial court properly exercised its discretion to deny a second continuance. Among other things, the court found that the plaintiff had failed to make the statutorily required showing to justify a second continuance, and it rejected her attempt to shift the blame to her prior counsel for the delay in preparing an opposition.