If a motion is granted in favour of bringing a cross-complaint to trial, can the motion also be denied because the parties had failed to reach a settlement?

If there had been mutual bona fide efforts to compromise and settle the action and petitioners had delayed bringing the cross-complaint to trial because of a reasonable belief induced by the nature of the negotiations that a trial could probably be avoided, denial of the motion could be an abuse of discretion. However, demands by one party for settlement and consistent denials of liability and refusals to offer anything in settlement by the other party do not amount to negotiations such as would excuse delay in prosecuting the cross-complaint. (Cameron v. Cameron (1952) 110 Cal.App.2d 258, 261-262, 242 P.2d 408.) ⁵ Under the instant facts, we conclude that petitioners' unilateral attempts at settlement do not amount to excusable delay.