Judge: Audra Mori, Case: BC695952, Date: 2022-08-23 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC695952    Hearing Date: August 23, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff Silvia L. Martinez (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant National Stores, Inc. (“Defendant”) for damages relating to Plaintiff’s alleged slip and fall in Defendant’s store.  On August 10, 2018, Defendant filed a Notice of Filing Bankruptcy Petition and Notice of Stay of Proceedings as to Defendant.  The case was then ordered stayed as to the entire action.  (Min. Order 28, 2018.)  On December 11, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Order Granting Limited Relief from the Automatic Stay providing that the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware entered an order permitting Plaintiff in this action to pursue and liquidate her claims against Defendant’s applicable insurance coverage.  On July 22, 2021, Hartford Fire Insurance Company (“Hartford”) filed an ex parte application for an order for leave to file a complaint-in-intervention so that it could defend its interests in this action, given its insured’s, Defendant, status as a suspended corporation.  The ex parte request was granted, and Hartford filed its complaint-in-intervention.  (Min. Order July 22, 2021.) 

At this time, Plaintiff moves for leave to file a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”).  Plaintiff provides that the motion seeks only to correct the address of the store at which the underlying incident occurred.  The motion is unopposed.

The court may, in furtherance of justice, and on such terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading.  CCP §§473 and 576.  Judicial policy favors resolution of all disputed matters between the parties and, therefore, leave to amend is generally liberally granted.  The application for leave to amend should be made as soon as the need to amend is discovered.  The closer the trial date, the stronger the showing required for leave to amend.  If the party seeking the amendment has been dilatory, and the delay has prejudiced the opposing party, the Court has the discretion to deny leave to amend.  Hirsa v. Superior Court (1981) 118 Cal.App.3d 486, 490. 

Prejudice exists where the amendment would require delaying the trial, resulting in loss of critical evidence, or added costs of preparation such as an increased burden of discovery.  Magpali v. Farmers Group, Inc. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 471, 486-488.

Here, Plaintiff provides that the complaint inadvertently contains the incorrect address for the location of the subject slip and fall incident.  Plaintiff contends the proposed FAC seeks to correctly identify the address of Plaintiff’s slip and fall, and that no other changes are being made.  Further, Plaintiff avers the FAC will not delay trial and will not prejudice any party, as Defendant already agreed to take a second deposition of Plaintiff.  Hartford does not oppose this motion, and thus, does not establish that it will be prejudiced in any manner by allowing Plaintiff to file the FAC with the correct address of the alleged slip and fall incident. 

Based on the foregoing, the motion is granted.  Plaintiff is ordered to file a separate copy of her FAC within five days.  Plaintiff is ordered to serve Hartford in compliance with the Rules of Court. 

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice. 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

• 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 23^rd day of August 2022