Judge: Armen Tamzarian, Case: 22STCV10204, Date: 2024-09-26 Tentative Ruling

Please notify Department 52 via email at smcdept52@lacourt.org and indicate that the parties are submitting on the tentative ruling. Please provide the attorney's name and represented party. Please notify the opposing side via email if submitting on the Court's tentative ruling.

Case Number: 22STCV10204    Hearing Date: September 26, 2024    Dept: 52

Defendant Betty Wyman’s Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint

Defendant Betty Wyman moves for leave to file a cross-complaint against plaintiffs Raymond Saviss and Helen Saviss, co-defendant Manuela S. Chamchoum, co-defendant City of Los Angeles, and against all persons unknown, claiming any right in the subject property adverse to Wyman’s title.

Denying leave to file a compulsory cross-complaint against the plaintiffs requires “bad faith of the moving party.”  (Silver Organizations Ltd. v. Frank (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 94, 99; accord CCP § 426.50.)  A cross-complaint that does not bring compulsory cross-claims against the plaintiffs “may be filed at any time before the court has set a date for trial.”  (CCP § 428.50(b).)  Courts may grant leave to file an untimely cross-complaint “in the interest of justice at any time during the course of the action.”  (Id., subd. (c).) 

For her compulsory cross-claims against plaintiffs, Wyman adequately shows she did not act in bad faith.  For her permissive cross-claims against other parties, granting Wyman leave to file the proposed cross-complaint serves the interest of justice by avoiding “a multiplicity of actions.”  (Heshejin v. Rostami (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 984, 993.)   

Disposition

Defendant Betty Wyman’s motion for leave to file a cross-complaint is granted.  Defendant shall file her cross-complaint (attached as exhibit 3 to the declaration of Scott R. Laes) forthwith.