Corrinet

*813 Mark Corrinet (plaintiff) appeals from a judgment dismissing his lawsuit for failure to prosecute. ( Code Civ. Proc., §§ 583.410 - 583.430.) 1 Plaintiff contends this discretionary dismissal was error when, among other things, a trial date had been set pursuant to the parties' stipulation and the case was ready for trial. We reverse the judgment.

I. THE DISCRETIONARY DISMISSAL STATUTE

Section 583.410, subdivision (a) provides that a "court may in its discretion dismiss an action for delay in prosecution ... if to do so appears to the court appropriate under the circumstances of the case." This discretion is qualified by section 583.420, subdivision (a), which states that a court may not dismiss an action for delay in prosecution unless one of the specified "conditions has occurred." ( Roman v. Usary Tire & Service Center (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1422 , 1430, 35 Cal.Rptr.2d 329 .) Pertinent here, a discretionary dismissal is authorized when the action "is not brought to trial within ... [t]hree years after the action is commenced against the defendant." (§ 583.420, subd. (a)(2)(A).)

California Rule of Court 3.1342 ( rule 3.1342 ) provides that a proper determination of a…