Judge: Colin Leis, Case: 22STCV09162, Date: 2023-04-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV09162    Hearing Date: April 11, 2023    Dept: 74

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT 

DEPARTMENT 74 

MOVING PARTY:                Plaintiff International West, LLC.

RESPONDING PARTY:       Espinal Trucking, LLC.

Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint.

The court considered the moving papers. Defendant has not filed an opposition.

BACKGROUND 

            This action arises from an accident. The truck of Defendant Espinal Trucking, LLC (Defendant) crashed into the property of Plaintiff International West, LLC (Plaintiff).

            On March 15, 2022, Plaintiff filed a complaint, alleging causes of action for negligence and negligent hiring, supervision, and retention of employees.

            During discovery in January 2023, Plaintiff learned facts that could potentially support causes of action for negligence per se, conversion, and trespass to chattels.

            On March 13, 2023, Plaintiff filed this motion for leave to amend its complaint to include the new facts and additional causes of action.

LEGAL STANDARD         

Under 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 will grant Plaintiff’s motion. The court finds no delay on Plaintiff’s part because Plaintiff did not learn of facts supporting new causes of action until the parties were in the midst of discovery. (Creekmore Decl., ¶ 4.) Also, the court does not find any potential prejudice to Defendant, given that the trial is nearly seven months away. Further, Plaintiff has attached the proposed first amended complaint, specified which causes of action and factual allegations it has added, and included the necessary separate supporting declaration.

CONCLUSION 

Based on the foregoing, the court grants Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the complaint.

Plaintiff shall file and serve its first amended complaint within three days of this order.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 DATED:  ¿April 11, 2023 

_____________________________ 

Colin Leis 

Judge of the Superior Court