Judge: Colin Leis, Case: 23STCV13064, Date: 2025-03-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV13064    Hearing Date: March 24, 2025    Dept: 74

Ji v. Park et al.  

Plaintiff Minah Ji’s Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint

BACKGROUND 

This motion arises from a labor code violation action.

Plaintiff Minah Ji filed a complaint against her employers Naomi Park and David Sung Soo Choi.  Plaintiff filed plaintiff’s second amended complaint on August 16, 2024.

Plaintiff seeks leave to file a third amended complaint (TAC),

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 3.1324(b).) 

DISCUSSION

             Plaintiff’s motion attaches counsel’s declaration, which states that the amendment is necessary and proper but fails to state when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered or the reason the amendment was not made earlier.  Plaintiff’s motion therefore does not satisfy the procedural requirements for leave to amend under California Rules of Court rule 3.1324(b).

CONCLUSION

            The Court denies Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend.

            Plaintiff to provide notice.