Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 22STCV07217, Date: 2023-01-31 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV07217    Hearing Date: January 31, 2023    Dept: 28

Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc.’s Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint

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

BACKGROUND

On February 28, 2022, Plaintiffs Jean-Louis Kolopp (“Jean-Louis”), Jean-Jerome Kolopp (“Jean-Jerome”), Jean-Nicolas Kolopp (“Jean-Nicolas”), Marie-Catherine Lefevre-Kolopp (“Lefevre”), Marie-Nathalie Sarda-Kolopp (“Sarda”), Jean-Pierre Kolopp (“Jean-Pierre”) and Gary Button (“Bitton”) filed this action against Defendants American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (“AHM”), Valencia H. Imports, Inc. (“VHI”), Autonation, Inc. (“Autonation”), Manuel Soria (“Soria”), Fidel Mendoza Transporation, Inc. (“Fidel”), 1^st Quality Transport (“1st”), Nereida Mendoza (“Mendoza”) and Sierra Pacific Industries (“SPI”) for strict products liability, negligent—products liability, negligence/negligent entrustment.

On May 11, 2022, SPI filed an answer. On May 17, 2022, SPI filed a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendant Fidel for breach of contract, tortious breach of duty, breach of contract to procure insurance, negligent hiring, supervision & retention, express indemnity, equitable indemnity, apportionment of fault and declaratory relief.

On June 2, 2022, AHM and VHI filed an answer.

On January 4, 2023, AHM filed a Motion for Leave to File a Cross-Complaint to be heard on January 31, 2023.

Trial is currently scheduled for August 28, 2023.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

AHM request leave to file a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendants Soria, Fidel, 1^st and Mendoza for equitable indemnity, contribution and declaratory relief.

LEGAL STANDARD

CCP § 426.50 provides “A party who fails to plead a cause of action subject to the requirements of this article, whether through oversight, inadvertence, mistake, neglect, or other cause, may apply to the court for leave to amend his pleading, or to file a cross-complaint, to assert such cause at any time during the course of the action. The court, after notice to the adverse party, shall grant, upon such terms as may be just to the parties, leave to amend the pleading, or to file the cross-complaint, to assert such cause if the party who failed to plead the cause acted in good faith. This subdivision shall be liberally construed to avoid forfeiture of causes of action.”

DISCUSSION

Plaintiffs’ complaint alleges that Decedent passed away from injuries stemming from an accident in which Defendants rear-ended Decedent’s vehicle. AHM allegedly produced Decedent’s vehicle. Plaintiffs served discovery responses to AHM, including a California Highway Patrol Traffic Collision Report, indicating the parties involved in the accident and that driving defendants were at fault. Upon receiving this information, AHM timely requested leave to file a cross-complaint against the relevant parties. The Court finds there is good cause to allow leave to file the Cross-Complaint, as AHM acted quickly and it is based upon facts and parties already included in the base complaint. These parties have also yet to appear in the complaint, indicating there is no prejudice to their inclusion now.

CONCLUSION

Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc.’s Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint is GRANTED. AHM is ordered to file and serve the Cross-Complaint within 30 days of the hearing on this motion.

            Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

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

The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.