Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 22STCV01895, Date: 2022-08-30 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV01895    Hearing Date: August 30, 2022    Dept: 28

Plaintiff Crisitian Arias Romero s Motion for Leave to File the First Amended Complaint

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. 

BACKGROUND

On January 18, 2022, Plaintiff Crisitian Arias Romero (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Summer Property Investments LLC (“Summer”) for premises liability. Plaintiff later amended the complaint to include Defendants Maria Echeverry (“Maria”) and Jose Echeverry (“Jose”).

Defendants filed an answer on April 19, 2022.

On May 23, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to File the First Amended Complaint to be heard on August 30, 2022.

Trial is currently scheduled for July 18, 2023.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Plaintiff requests leave to file and serve the proposed First Amended Complaint. Plaintiff’s proposed amendments consist of adding two causes of action for violations of the fair housing act and civil stalking, and facts to support these causes of action.

LEGAL STANDARD

CCP 472(a)provides “Any pleading may be amended once by the party of course, and without costs, at any time before the answer or demurrer is filed, or after demurrer and before the trial of the issue of law thereon, by filing the same as amended and serving a copy on the adverse party, and the time in which the adverse party must respond thereto shall be computed from the date of notice of the amendment.”

CCP §473(a) states “(1) The court may, in furtherance of justice, and on any terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading or proceeding by adding or striking out the name of any party, or by correcting a mistake in the name of a party, or a mistake in any other respect; and may, upon like terms, enlarge the time for answer or demurrer. The court may likewise, in its discretion, after notice to the adverse party, allow, upon any terms as may be just, an amendment to any pleading or proceeding in other particulars; and may upon like terms allow an answer to be made after the time limited by this code.

(2) When it appears to the satisfaction of the court that the amendment renders it necessary, the court may postpone the trial, and may, when the postponement will by the amendment be rendered necessary, require, as a condition to the amendment, the payment to the adverse party of any costs as may be just.”

CCP §576 provides: “Any judge, at any time before or after commencement of trial, in the furtherance of justice, and upon such terms as may be proper, may allow the amendment of any pleading or pretrial conference order.”

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff’s original complaint provided that Plaintiff was injured when he walked on broken/cracked tiles of Defendants’ subject premises.

Plaintiff requests the Court grant leave to amend to add in two causes of action, along with facts in support of the causes of action. The first cause of action is for violations of the fair housing act. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants told Plaintiff they only rented to people of Mexican origin, which Plaintiff states he did not know was illegal at the time of filing the original complaint. The Court is confused by this argument; Plaintiff is not acting in pro-per. At all times since the filing of this action, Plaintiff has had an attorney who is not excused from knowing whether or not an action is potentially illegal. Plaintiff’s second new cause of action is for civil stalking and alleges that an unknown individual has been stalking Plaintiff on behalf of Defendants since the beginning of this litigation. Generally speaking, amendments are allowed as long as they relate to the same general set of facts. (Atkinson v. Elk Corp. (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 739, 761.) Both causes of action are derived from either Plaintiff’s tenancy with Defendants or the current ongoing case. As such, the Court will grant the motion.

Plaintiff also requests leave to amend to add additional facts in support of the currently alleged cause of action. The Court finds there is good cause to allow Plaintiff to add factual allegations to the complaint in order to better direct discovery.

CONCLUSION

Plaintiff Crisitian Arias Romero s Motion for Leave to File the First Amended Complaint is GRANTED.

Moving Party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.