Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 20STCV35771, Date: 2024-06-28 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 20STCV35771 Hearing Date: June 28, 2024 Dept: 32
PLEASE NOTE: Parties are
encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if
a resolution may be reached. If the
parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this
tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit. The email shall include the case number, date
and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the
identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling. If the Court does not receive an email
indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no
appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or
adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. If all parties do not submit on this
tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely. Further, after the
Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent
authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the
tentative ruling as the order of the Court.
TENTATIVE
RULING
|
DEPT: |
32 |
|
HEARING DATE: |
June
28, 2024 |
|
CASE NUMBER: |
20STCV35771 |
|
MOTIONS: |
Motion
for Leave to File Amended Cross Complaint |
|
Cross-Complainants GTL1, LLC, California Asphalt Production, Inc., and Randeep S. Grewal |
|
|
OPPOSING PARTY: |
Unopposed |
BACKGROUND
On September 18, 2020,
Plaintiff Southbay Transport, Inc. et al. filed a complaint against Jonelle Oil
Corporation and Does 1 through 10, alleging negligence and premises liability.
Pursuant to stipulation, on
October 25, 2022, Defendants GTL1, LLC, California Asphalt Production, Inc.,
and Randeep S. Grewal (cross-complainants) filed a cross-complaint against Del
Toro Equipment, LLC, Southbay Transport, Inc., Steve Self and Jonell Oil
Corporation alleging causes of action for indemnification and apportionment of
fault.
On April 30, 2024, Cross-Complainants
filed the instant motion for leave to file an amended cross-complaint adding a
cause of action for negligence. No opposition has been filed.
LEGAL
STANDARD
A cross-complaint against any of the parties who filed the
initial complaint or cross-complaint against the cross-complainant must be
filed before or at the same time as the answer to the initial complaint or
cross-complaint, which answer must be filed within 30 days of service of the
complaint or cross-complaint. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 412.20(a)(3),
428.50(a), 432.10.) Any other cross-complaint may be filed at any time
before the court has set a trial date. (Code Civ. Proc.
§428.50(b).)
If a party fails to file a cross-complaint within the time
limits described above, they must obtain permission from the court to file the
cross-complaint. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 426.50, 428.50(c).) Leave to
file a mandatory cross-complaint must be granted absent bad faith. (Silver
Organizations, Ltd. v. Frank (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 94, 99.) Leave to
file a permissive cross-complaint need only be granted in the interest of
justice. (Code Civ. Proc. § 428.50(c).)
DISCUSSION
Here, Cross-Complainants seeks to
amend the cross-complaint to add a cause of action for negligence. The
complaint and amended cross-complaint arise from the same incident and should
be litigated together. There does not appear to be prejudice to any party by
the filing of the cross-complaint. Accordingly, the Court finds it to be in the
interests of justice to grant leave to file a cross-complaint.
CONCLUSION AND
ORDER
Therefore, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion for leave to file a
cross-complaint. Defendant is ordered to file and serve the
cross-complaint within 10 days.
Defendant shall give notice of the
Court’s order and file a proof of service of such.