Judge: H. Jay Ford, III, Case: 23SMCV00434, Date: 2024-11-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMCV00434    Hearing Date: November 19, 2024    Dept: O

 Case Name:  Cacciatore v. Gold’s Gym International, Inc., et al.

SUBJECT:                 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ANSWER

MOVING PARTY:   Defendants Gold’s Gym California, LLC (Doe 1), Google, Inc., and the Richlar Partnership

RESP. PARTY:         No Responsive Party as of 11-14-24

TENTATIVE RULING

            Defendants Gold’s Gym California, LLC (Doe 1), Google, Inc., and the Richlar Partnerships’ Motion for Leave to Amend their Answer is GRANTED. The motion includes a copy of the proposed amended answer pursuant to Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324(b). (Edic Decl., ¶ 5, Ex. B.) Defendants counsel William S. Edic (“Edic”) includes a declaration specifying the effects of the amendments, why the amendment is necessary and proper, when the facts giving rise to the amendment were discovered, and the reason why the amendment was not made earlier pursuant to Cal Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324(b). (Edic Decl., ¶¶ 2–4, Ex. A.) The Court finds that the motion is timely and there will no prejudice to the Plaintiff because the trial is set for a little under a year from this motion hearing. Additionally, Plaintiff did not file any opposition, thus Plaintiff did not argue prejudice if the motion is granted.

            Defendants are ordered to file the amended answer forthwith.