Judge: Colin Leis, Case: 22BBCV00191, Date: 2022-08-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22BBCV00191    Hearing Date: August 24, 2022    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – NORTHEAST DISTRICT

DEPARTMENT 3

MOVING PARTY:                Defendant PSD Automotive Group, LLC

RESPONDING PARTY:       N/A

Defendant PSD Automotive Group, LLC, fdba Duarte Nissan Motor Group, LLC dba Nissan of Duarte’s Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer

The court considered the moving papers filed in connection with this motion. No opposition was filed.

BACKGROUND

            Plaintiff Cristian Segura Reyes filed this action on March 3, 2020 against Defendant Duarte Nissan Motor Group, LLC dba Nissan of Duarte, asserting various causes of action arising out of the purchase of a 2019 Nissan Altima.

            In or around March 2022, counsel for Defendant learned that Defendant had sold the dealership on August 5, 2019. (Berberich Decl., ¶¶ 3-4.)

            Defendant now moves for leave to file an amended answer that clarifies that Defendant is the previous owner of the dealership.

LEGAL STANDARD

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (a)(1), “[t]he court may, in furtherance of justice, and on any terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading.”  Amendment may be allowed at any time before or after commencement of trial. (Code Civ. Proc., § 576.) “[T]he court’s discretion will usually be exercised liberally to permit amendment of the pleadings. The policy favoring amendment is so strong that it is a rare case in which denial of leave to amend can be justified.” (Howard v. County of San Diego (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1422, 1428 (internal citations omitted).) “If the motion to amend is timely made and the granting of the motion will not prejudice the opposing party, it is error to refuse permission to amend….”  (Morgan v. Sup. Ct. (1959) 172 Cal.App.2d 527, 530.) Prejudice includes “delay in trial, loss of critical evidence, or added costs of preparation.” (Solit v. Tokai Bank, Ltd. New York Branch (1999) 68 Cal.App.4th 1435, 1448.)

A motion to amend a pleading before trial must include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended pleading, which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous pleadings or amendments. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(a).) The motion must also state what allegations are proposed to be deleted or added, by page, paragraph, and line number.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(a).) Finally, a separate supporting declaration specifying the effect of the amendment, why the amendment is necessary and proper, when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered, and the reason the request for amendment was not made earlier must also accompany the motion. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.134(b).)

DISCUSSION

The court finds that Defendant has complied with the procedural requirements associated with the motion. The court also finds that there will be no prejudice as a result of the amendment.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, the court grants Defendant’s motion for leave to file an amended answer.

The court orders Defendant to file and serve the First Amended Answer within 3 days of the date of this order.

Defendant is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:  August 24, 2022

_____________________________

Colin Leis

Judge of the Superior Court