Judge: Daniel S. Murphy, Case: 23STCV24356, Date: 2024-01-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV24356    Hearing Date: February 26, 2024    Dept: 32

BACKGROUND

            On October 6, 2023, Plaintiff Brian Armstrong filed this employment action against Defendants FH Investment Partnership, LP, Jeffrey Breitman, and Marla Breitman.

            On January 4, 2024, Plaintiff attempted to file a First Amended Complaint, which the Court deemed invalid because Defendant FH Investment had answered the complaint by that time, and Plaintiff did not obtain leave of court to file the FAC. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 472(a).) The Court also quashed the service of summons as to Defendants Jeffrey and Marla Breitman.

            On January 29, 2024, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for leave to file the FAC. Defendant FH Investment filed its opposition on February 9, 2024. Plaintiff filed his reply on February 16, 2024.

LEGAL STANDARD

The court may, in furtherance of justice, and on such terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading. (Code Civ. Proc, §§ 473, subd. (a), 576.) Courts must apply a policy of liberality in permitting amendments at any stage of the proceeding, including during trial, when no prejudice to the opposing party is shown. (Duchrow v. Forrest (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1359, 1377.) In determining the extent of prejudice to the opposing party, the court must consider various factors, such as whether the amendment would delay trial or increase the discovery burden. (Demetriades v. Yelp, Inc. (2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 294, 306.)

DISCUSSION

A motion for leave to amend a complaint must be accompanied by a declaration that explains: (1) the effect of the amendment; (2) why the amendment is necessary and proper; (3) when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered; and (4) the reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier. (Cal. Rules of Ct., Rule 3.1324(b).)

Here, counsel’s declaration explains the effect of the amendment: “Plaintiff seeks by this request to file a First Amended Statement of Claims (‘FAC’) adding causes of action for unlawful actions by landlord to influence tenant to vacate, breach of implied covenant of quiet enjoyment, breach of written lease agreement, breach of employment contract, and international infliction of emotional distress.” (Moossaian Decl. ¶ 4.) Counsel further explains that while the original complaint arose from Plaintiff’s employment with Defendants, Defendants’ recent cross-complaint (filed December 2023) for unpaid rent necessitated Plaintiff to amend his complaint to seek relief relating to his tenancy. (Id., ¶ 3.) This substantially complies with the requirements of Rule 3.1324(b).

Additionally, the case was initiated very recently in October 2023. Therefore, there is no significant delay to be explained. (See Royal Thrift & Loan Co. v. County Escrow, Inc. (2004) 123 Cal.App.4th 24, 41 [an amendment is properly denied “when offered after long unexplained delay or on the eve of trial”].) Absent prejudice, which Defendant has not shown, courts liberally grant leave to amend. (Duchrow, supra, 215 Cal.App.4th at p. 1377.)

CONCLUSION

            Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend is GRANTED.