Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 19STCV33844, Date: 2023-05-10 Tentative Ruling
All parties are
urged to meet and confer with all parties concerning this tentative ruling to
see if they can reach an agreed-upon resolution of their matter. If
you are able to reach an agreement, please notify the courtroom staff in
advance of the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative ruling rather
than argue the motion by notifying the court by e-mailing the court at: SSCDEPT28@lacourt.org. Include
the word "SUBMITS" in all caps and the Case Number in the Subject
line. In the body of the email, please provide the date and time of the
hearing, your name, your contact information, the party you represent, and
whether that party is a plaintiff, defendant, cross-complainant,
cross-defendant, claimant, intervenor, or non-party, etc.
Please be
advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the
hearing, the opposing party may still appear at the hearing and argue the
matter, and the court could change its tentative based upon the
argument. Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in
the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.
If you submit, but still intend to appear, include the words "SUBMITS, BUT
WILL APPEAR" in the Subject line. If you elect to
argue your matter, you are urged to do so remotely, via Court-Connect.
Note that once the Court has issued a tentative, the Court has the inherent
authority not to allow the withdrawal of a motion and to adopt the tentative
ruling as the order of the court.
If you submitted a courtesy copy of
your papers containing media (such as a DVD or thumb drive), unless you request
the return of the media in your papers, the court will destroy it following the
hearing of your matter.
Case Number: 19STCV33844 Hearing Date: May 10, 2023 Dept: 28
Background
This is a medical malpractice case. On March
2, 2023, Plaintiffs Victor Tsai, Alice Tsai, and Rose Tsai moved for leave to
file the third amended complaint to add the cause of action of elder abuse.
Legal Standard
A
motion for leave to amend a pleading must comply with the procedural
requirements of California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, which requires a
supporting declaration to set forth explicitly stating what new evidence was
discovered warranting the amendment and why the amendment was not made earlier.
The
motion must include (1) a copy of the proposed and numbered amendment, (2)
specifications by reference to pages and lines that would be deleted and added,
and (3) a declaration specifying the effect, necessity and propriety of the
amendments, date of discovery and reasons for delay. (See Cal. Rules of Court,
rule 3.1324, subds. (a), (b).)
Preliminarily,
Plaintiffs included a copy of the proposed amended pleading. However,
Plaintiffs did not specify by reference pages and lines that would be deleted
and added. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subd. (a).)
Thus, the
Court denies, without prejudice, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Third
Amended Complaint.
Conclusion
Plaintiffs’
Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint is DENIED.
The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.