Coe

Coe v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 326·24 Cal. App. 4th 88·29 Cal. Rptr. 2d 297·94 Daily Journal DAR 5107·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2661
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 14, 1994B067492California1,468 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hastings, J.

Appellants seek reversal of an order dismissing their complaint based upon violation of the five-year statute within which a matter must be brought to trial. (Code Civ. Proc., § 583.310.) They also contend that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to grant two ex parte applications to reset trial prior to the running of the five-year statute. Commendably, respondent concedes that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to credit appellants with trailing time when no courtroom was available and, therefore, dismissal of the matter pursuant to the five-year statute was premature. We agree with both parties and reverse.

Facts

On December 2, 1985, appellants were injured in an automobile accident. On October 16, 1986, they filed suit naming respondent City of Los Angeles as a defendant, claiming that defective maintenance of city streets caused the accident. On November 13, 1986, respondents answered the complaint and an at-issue memorandum was filed on November 18, 1986. The matter was ordered to arbitration which was held on February 11, 1988, resulting in an award in favor of the plaintiffs on February 12, 1988.

On March 1, 1988, respondent filed a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.