Judge: Armen Tamzarian, Case: 23STCV31645, Date: 2025-05-13 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: 23STCV31645    Hearing Date: May 13, 2025    Dept: 52

Plaintiff Maria Angie Mendoza’s Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint

Plaintiff Maria Angie Mendoza moves for leave to file a first amended complaint to assert new causes of action.  Code of Civil Procedure section 473(a)(1) provides, “The court may, in furtherance of justice, and on any terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading.”  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.) 

A motion for leave to amend will normally be granted unless (a) the party seeking to amend 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.)  Though plaintiff could have brought this motion months earlier, defendant General Motors LLC does not show that plaintiff’s delay will cause undue prejudice.  That plaintiff could have brought these causes of action from the start does not suffice to show the delay was prejudicial.  All claims in the first amended complaint arising from the same facts as the initial complaint.      

Defendant also argues the amendments would be futile because plaintiff fails to allege sufficient facts for the new causes of action.  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.)  The court will permit plaintiff to file the first amended complaint.  Defendant can then challenge plaintiff’s new causes of action. 

Plaintiff Maria Angie Mendoza’s motion for leave to file a first amended complaint is granted.  Plaintiff is ordered to file her proposed first amended complaint (attached as exhibit C to the declaration of Armig Khodanian) forthwith.