Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 24STCV13038, Date: 2025-03-27 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCV13038 Hearing Date: March 27, 2025 Dept: 14
#11
Case Background
This is an action for sexual battery and assault,
violations of the FEHA, negligence, negligent hiring, negligent failure to
warn, and negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff
alleges she suffered sexual harassment, battery, and assault while she was
employed as a personal assistant to Defendant Sausedo.
On January 6, 2025, Plaintiff filed this motion for
leave to file a First Amended Complaint (FAC).
On March 14, 2025, Defendants filed an opposition.
On March 19, 2025, Plaintiff filed a reply.
Instant Pleading
Plaintiff moves for leave to file an FAC.
Decision
Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an FAC is DENIED.
Legal Standard
The
court may, in furtherance of justice and on any proper terms, allow a party to
amend any pleading by adding or striking out the name of any party, or by
correcting a mistake in the name of a party, or a mistake in any other respect.
(Code Civ. Proc., section 473, subd. (a)(1); Branick v. Downey Savings &
Loan Association (2006) 39 Cal.4th 235, 242.) The court may also, in its
discretion and after notice to the adverse party, allow, upon any terms as may
be just, an amendment to any pleading or proceeding in other particulars; and
may upon like terms allow an answer to be made after the time limited by this
code. (Code Civ. Proc., section 473, subd. (a)(1); Branick, supra, 39
Cal.4th at 242.) As judicial policy favors resolution of all disputed matters
between the parties, leave to amend is generally liberally granted. (See Kolani
v. Gluska (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 402, 412.) The court may deny the
plaintiff’s leave to amend if there is prejudice to the opposing party, such as
delay in trial, loss of critical evidence, or added costs of preparation. (Id.)
A motion to amend a pleading
before trial must (1) include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended
pleading, which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous
pleadings or amendments; (2) 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 (3) 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. (Cal. Rules
of Court, rule 3.1324(a).) A separate supporting declaration specifying (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 reason why the request for amendment was not made earlier must accompany
the motion. (Id., rule 3.1324(b).)
Discussion
Plaintiff moves to file an FAC on the grounds that
initial discovery in this case revealed facts giving rise to additional causes
of action for labor code violations and wage and hour violations. Plaintiff’s
counsel submitted a declaration which failed to address when the facts giving
rise to the amended allegations were discovered and the reason why the request
for amendment was not made earlier. Although the moving papers allege that
Plaintiff discovered new facts after receiving discovery responses from Defendants,
this information must be contained in a separate supporting declaration under Cal.
Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(b).) Because Plaintiff fails to meet the
requirements of Rule 3.1324, the motion is denied.
Conclusion
Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an FAC is DENIED.