Judge: Curtis A. Kin, Case: 21STCV13633, Date: 2023-03-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV13633    Hearing Date: March 2, 2023    Dept: 72

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT

Date:              3/2/23 (8:30 AM)                   

Case:             Susan Gradman et al. v. Parkview Limited Investors, LP (21STCV13633)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiffs Susan Gradman and Wayne Gradman’s Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint is GRANTED.

Plaintiffs Susan Gradman and Wayne Gradman seek leave to file a Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs seek to add nine additional defendants and eleven causes of action based on their assertion that they have rights to distributions, financial records, and an accounting of defendant Parkview Limited Investors, LP.

Where the plaintiff is the party seeking leave to amend, mere proximity to the trial date, absent any prejudice, does not constitute ground for denial if the plaintiff is amenable to a continuance of the trial date. (Mesler v. Bragg Mgt. Co. (1985) 39 Cal.3d 290, 297.) Regardless of any delay in seeking to file a Third Amended Complaint, plaintiffs are amenable to a continuance of a trial date to accommodate the proposed defendants. (Goodfried Decl. ¶ 8.) Defendant fails to show any prejudice which would warrant denial of the motion.

Defendant’s contention that the proposed Third Amended Complaint is a sham or otherwise defective can be addressed with an appropriate attack on the pleadings. (Kittredge Sports Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 1045, 1048 [“[T]he preferable practice [is] to permit the amendment and allow the parties to test its legal sufficiency by demurrer, motion for judgment on the pleadings or other appropriate proceedings”].)

The motion is GRANTED. Within two (2) court days hereof, plaintiffs Susan Gradman and Wayne Gradman are ordered to file the proposed Third Amended Complaint attached as Exhibit 2 to the declaration of Jeffrey S. Goodfried in support of the motion.