Judge Christopher K. Lui, Case Number: 24STCV12998, Date: 2025-02-04 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Christopher K. Lui, Case: 24STCV12998, Date: 2025-02-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV12998 Hearing Date: February 4, 2025 Dept: 76

The following tentative ruling is issued pursuant to Rule of Court 3.1308 at 11:50 AM on February 3, 2025.

Notice of intent to appear is REQUIRED pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1308(a)(1). The Court does not desire oral argument on the motion addressed herein.

As required by Rule 3.1308(a)(1), any party seeking oral argument must notify ALL OTHER PARTIES and the staff of Department 76 by 4:00 p.m. on February 3, 2025.

Notice to Department 76 may be sent by email to smcdept76@lacourt.org or telephonically at 213-830-0776.

Per Rule of Court 3.1308, the Court may not entertain oral argument if notice of intention to appear is not given.

Plaintiffs allege that Defendants have failed to remediate uninhabitable conditions as the property leased by Plaintiff.

Defendants SBDTLA 1, LLC, SBDTLA 2, LLC, SBDTLA 3, LLC and SBDTLA 4, LLC move to file a Cross-Complaint against Mez Inc. for indemnity.

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendants SBDTLA 1, LLC, SBDTLA 2, LLC, SBDTLA 3, LLC and SBDTLA 4, LLC’s motion for leave to file a cross-complaint is GRANTED. Defendants are to file a stand-alone copy of the Cross-Complaint today. The Cross-Complaint is deemed served as of the date of this order.

ANALYSIS

Motion For Leave To File Cross-Complaint

Defendants SBDTLA 1, LLC, SBDTLA 2, LLC, SBDTLA 3, LLC and SBDTLA 4, LLC move to file a Cross-Complaint against Mez Inc. for indemnity.

Civ. Proc. Code, § 428.50 provides:

(a) A party shall file a cross-complaint against any of the parties who filed the complaint or cross-complaint against him or her before or at the same time as the answer to the complaint or cross-complaint.

(b) Any other cross-complaint may be filed at any time before the court has set a date for trial.

(c) A party shall obtain leave of court to file any cross-complaint except one filed within the time specified in subdivision (a) or (b). Leave may be granted in the interest of justice at any time during the course of the action.

(Civ. Proc. Code, § 428.50(a)-(c)[bold emphasis added].)

Civ. Proc. Code § 426.50 provides:

A party who fails to plead a cause of action subject to the requirements of this article, whether through oversight, inadvertence, mistake, neglect, or other cause, may apply to the court for leave to amend his pleading, or to file a cross-complaint, to assert such cause at any time during the course of the action. The court, after notice to the adverse party, shall grant, upon such terms as may be just to the parties, leave to amend the pleading, or to file the cross-complaint, to assert such cause if the party who failed to plead the cause acted in good faith. This subdivision shall be liberally construed to avoid forfeiture of causes of action.

(Code Civ. Proc., § 426.50.)

Leave to file a cross-complaint may be granted in the interest of justice at any time during the action. (Civ. Proc. Code, § 428.50(c).

“A motion to file a cross-complaint at any time during the course of the action must be granted unless bad faith of the moving party is demonstrated where forfeiture would otherwise result. Factors such as oversight, inadvertence, neglect, mistake or other cause, are insufficient grounds to deny the motion unless accompanied by bad faith.” (Silver Orgs. v. Frank (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 94, 99 [bold emphasis and underlining added].)

Here, Defendants have explained that the cross-complaint was not filed concurrently with the defendant’s answer because pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 428.50 the cross complaint is against new parties believed to bear fault, and the trial date was set prior to defendant having time to ascertain if there were substantial facts to support the cross-complaint. (See Declaration of Alexandra E.Liston.) The interest of justice requires that leave be granted so that a complete determination of controversies may be had in one action.

There is no indication the delay in seeking leave to file the Cross-Complaint was made in bad faith. A copy of the proposed Cross-Complaint is attached to the Declaration of Alexandra E. Liston as Exh. A.

The motion for leave to file a cross-complaint is GRANTED. Defendants are to file a stand-alone copy of the Cross-Complaint today. The Cross-Complaint is deemed served as of the date of this order.