Judge Holly J. Fujie, Case 21STCV42481 2023-04-12 Tentative Ruling

MOVING PARTY: Defendants/Cross-Complainants Brian Paya, Bita Paya, and the Paya Family 2013 Revocable Trust (collectively, “Moving Defendants”)

This action arises out of a landlord/tenant relationship. On February 7, 2022, Moving Defendants filed a cross-complaint (the “XC”) alleging: (1) negligence; (2) conversion; and (3) violations of California Contracting License Laws. On March 10, 2023, Moving Defendants filed a motion for leave to file a first amended cross-complaint (the “Motion”). Moving Defendants seek leave to file a first amended cross-complaint (the “FAXC”) that adds a cause of action for breach of contract.

California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 473 permits the trial court in its discretion to allow amendments to pleadings in the furtherance of justice. (CCP § 473, subd. (a)(1).) CCP section 576 provides that 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. (CCP § 576.) There is a policy of great liberality in permitting amendments to the pleadings at any stage of the proceeding. (Berman v. Bromberg (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 936, 945.) An application to amend a pleading is addressed to the trial judge’s sound discretion. (Id.) If the motion to amend is timely made and the granting of the motion will not prejudice the opposing party, it is error to refuse permission to amend and where the refusal also results in a party being deprived of the right to assert a meritorious cause of action or a meritorious defense, it is not only error but an abuse of discretion. (Morgan v. Superior Court of Cal. In and For Los Angeles County (1959) 172 Cal.App.2d 527, 530.) Where no prejudice is shown to the adverse party, the liberal rule of allowance prevails. (Higgins v. Del Faro (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 558, 564.)

Under California Rules of Court (“CRC”) rule 3.1324, a motion for leave to amend a pleading must be accompanied by a declaration that sets forth: (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 sooner. (CRC, r. 3.1324(b).)

The Motion does not include a declaration that sets forth the factual circumstances in which Moving Defendants discovered the need to amend the XC as required under CRC, rule 3.1323(b).[1] The Court therefore DENIES the Motion.

In consideration of the current COVID-19 pandemic situation, the Court strongly encourages that appearances on all proceedings, including this one, be made by LACourtConnect if the parties do not submit on the tentative. If you instead intend to make an appearance in person at Court on this matter, you must send an email by 2 p.m. on the last Court day before the scheduled date of the hearing to SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org stating your intention to appear in person. The Court will then inform you by close of business that day of the time your hearing will be held. The time set for the hearing may be at any time during that scheduled hearing day, or it may be necessary to schedule the hearing for another date if the Court is unable to accommodate all personal appearances set on that date. This rule is necessary to ensure that adequate precautions can be taken for proper social distancing.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

[1] In law and motion practice, facts are provided to the court via declarations Calcor Space Facility, Inc. v. Superior Court (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 216, 224.)