Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 22STCV08835, Date: 2023-01-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV08835    Hearing Date: January 27, 2023    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff

The Court has considered the moving papers.  No opposition papers were filed.  Any opposition papers were required to have been filed and served at least nine court days before the hearing under California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 1005, subdivision (b).

BACKGROUND

This action arises out of an employment relationship.  The currently operative first amended complaint (the “FAC”), filed on June 2, 2022, alleges: (1) violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act; (2) violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act; (3) invasion of privacy; (4) sexual battery; (5) negligent hiring and retention; (6) premises liability; and (7) declaratory relief. 

On December 22, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint (the “Motion”).  The proposed second amended complaint (the “SAC”) clarifies the allegations to include Thomas Roccapalumbo, who has been named as Doe 3, remove the claims alleged against now-dismissed Defendants Michelson Laboratories, Inc. and Grant Michelson, and correct a factual inaccuracy alleged in the FAC. 

DISCUSSION

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 complies with CRC, rule 3.1324.  For this reason and because it is unopposed, the Court GRANTS the Motion with five days leave to file the proposed SAC.  (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.)

            Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

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.

       Dated this 27th day of January 2023