Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 18STCV08702, Date: 2022-12-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 18STCV08702    Hearing Date: December 19, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

December 17, 2018, Plaintiff Yousry Naguib (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Zunich Insurance Company (“Zunich”) purporting to assert a cause of action for motor vehicle negligence.  On January 2, 2019, Plaintiff filed the operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) on Judicial Council form PLD-PI-001 omitting Zunich and naming Global Emergency Road Services LLC as a defendant.  The FAC purports to assert a claim for motor vehicle negligence, but there is no cause of action attached to the FAC. 

On September 4, 2020, Plaintiff attempted to file a Second Amended Complaint without leave of court, and thus, it was ordered stricken.  (Min. Order, Oct. 30, 2020.)  Thereafter, Plaintiff attempted to file a Third Amended Complaint again without leave of court, which the Court’s docket reflects was ordered stricken. 

Nearly two years later, on August 15, 2022, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for leave of court to amend the complaint.  The notice of motion states, “Plaintiff acknowledges his error in not requesting motion for leave of court to file Third Amended Complaint to include Robert Fogle and Global Emergency Road Service as Defendants. Attached please find Third Amended Complaint and Third Amended Summons. [sic]”  (Mot. at p. 1:21-23.) 

There are several issues that prevent the motion from being granted. 

First, the motion is not signed, (CCP § 128.7(a)), and there is no memorandum of points and authorities submitted with the moving papers.  (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1113 [“A party filing a motion … must serve and file a supporting memorandum. The court may construe the absence of a memorandum as an admission that the motion … is not meritorious and cause for its denial.”].) 

Second, Plaintiff did not submit the required separate declaration, or any declaration, specifying the “(1) The effect of the amendment; (2) Why the amendment is necessary and proper; (3) When the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered; and (4) The reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier.”  (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324(b).)  Thus, there is no evidence for the Court to consider in connection with the unsigned request for leave to amend.

Third, Plaintiff does not “State what allegations in the previous pleading are proposed to be deleted, if any, and where, by page, paragraph, and line number, the deleted allegations are located;” and “State what allegations are proposed to be added to the previous pleading, if any, and where, by page, paragraph, and line number, the additional allegations are located.”  (Id. at Rule 3.1324(a)(2)-(3).)  The above issues are compounded by the fact that Plaintiff is seeking leave to file a Third Amended Complaint when the operative pleading is the First Amended Complaint. 

The required information enables the Court to assess Plaintiff’s request.  The requested order cannot be based upon speculation or assumptions.  Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion is denied.  The denial is without prejudice to Plaintiff re-filing a motion for leave to amend after curing the above defects.  However, the Court notes this action is now over four years old, so Plaintiff must move expeditiously if Plaintiff intends to do so. 

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice. 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

·       The Court is not available to hear oral argument on this date.  If the parties do not submit on the tentative and want oral argument, the hearing will have to be continued, and the parties must work with the clerk to find an available date for the continuance.

• Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement.
• If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.  The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.  
• Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.  You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.  
• If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave. 

Dated this 19^th day of December 2022