Judge: Christopher K. Lui, Case: 24STCV31995, Date: 2025-05-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV31995    Hearing Date: May 6, 2025    Dept: 76

The following tentative ruling is issued pursuant to Rule of Court 3.1308 at 2:10 PM on May 5, 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 May 5, 2025.

Notice to Department 76 should be sent by email to smcdept76@lacourt.org, with opposing parties copied on the email.  The high volume of telephone calls to Department 76 may delay the Court’s receipt of notice, so telephonic notice to 213-830-0776 should be reserved for situations where parties are unable to give notice by email.

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

            Plaintiff worked as a cutter, fabricator and/or installer of stone slab products used to create countertops and allege exposure to toxic substances as a result of such work. Plaintiff has sued various defendants in the chain of distribution of said products for personal injuries which resulted from working with the products.

            Various Defendants have filed Cross-Complaints.

Defendant Raphael Stone CA, Inc. fka California-Quartz AKA California Quartz, Inc. moves for leave to file an amended answer.

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Raphael Stone CA, Inc. fka California-Quartz AKA California Quartz, Inc.’s motion for leave to file an amended answer is GRANTED. A Defendant’s has the right to amend an answer to the Complaint once before a demurrer to it is filed. (Civ. Proc. Code, § 472(a).)

If Plaintiff objects to the amended answer to be filed by Defendant Raphael Stone Ca, Inc, Plaintiff may demur or move to strike as to the amended answer. The Court notes that “California-Quartz” filed its own “Amended Answer” on March 21, 2025, so Plaintiff’s argument that Defendant is attempt to make an entity Defendant disappear does not appear to be well-taken. In any event, Plaintiff may demur to California-Quartz’s answer or move to strike it.

Defendant Raphael Stone is to file a stand-alone copy of the Amended Answer today, which is deemed to be served as of the date of this order.