Judge: Armen Tamzarian, Case: 21STCV29839, Date: 2022-07-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV29839    Hearing Date: July 25, 2022    Dept: 52

Tentative Ruling

Defendants Epyon LLC and Christopher Alarcon’s Motion for Leave to File First Amended Answer

Defendants Epyon LLC and Christopher Alarcon move for leave to file a first amended answer.  Courts have discretion to permit an amendment to any pleading “in furtherance of justice, and on any terms as may be proper.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (a)(1).)  Courts exercise their discretion “liberally to permit amendment,” and “[t]he policy favoring amendment is so strong that it is a rare case in which denial of leave to amend can be justified.”  (Howard v. County of San Diego (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1422, 1428.)  “In particular, liberality should be displayed in allowing amendments to answers, for a defendant denied leave to amend is permanently deprived of a defense.”  (Hulsey v. Koehler (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 1150, 1159.)

            Plaintiff Victor Alarcon opposes the motion on the grounds that the proposed first amended answer is a sham pleading.  In ruling on a motion for leave to amend, courts generally do not consider the amended pleading’s merits.  (Atkinson v. Elk Corp. (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 739, 760.)  Plaintiff can use other methods to challenge the first amended answer on the merits.

Plaintiff also contends that granting leave to amend would prejudice him.  Courts have discretion to deny leave to amend when (a) the moving party has delayed bringing the proposed amendment; and (b) the delay in seeking leave to amend will cause prejudice to an opposing party.  (Hirsa v. Superior Court (1981) 118 Cal.App.3d 486, 490.) 

Plaintiff does not articulate or provide evidence of any prejudice except for having to contest different allegations and affirmative defenses shortly before trial.  Defendants Epyon LLC and Christopher Alarcon should have sought to amend their answer earlier, but their delay does not justify permanently depriving them of defenses.  Permitting the amendment will not cause plaintiff sufficient prejudice to outweigh the policy favoring amendments.

The motion is granted.

 Defendants Epyon LLC and Christopher Alarcon are ordered to file their first amended answer forthwith.