Judge: James L. Crandall, Case: 22-1244666, Date: 2022-09-02 Tentative Ruling
1. Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint
2. Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint
3. Case Management Conference
Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint
Defendant Daniel Y.K. Chan’s motion for leave to file a cross-complaint is GRANTED.
Defendant seeks leave to file a cross-complaint alleging ten causes of action against Plaintiff Integritox Laboratories, LLC.
The proposed cross-complaint is attached as Exhibit 4 to the motion.
The cross-complaint arises from the employment relationship and contract which form the basis for Plaintiff’s complaint, filed on 2/9/22.
Cross complainant was initially self-represented in this matter. He attempted to file the cross-complaint on 3/18/22 after answering the complaint and the filing was rejected. Plaintiff is now represented by counsel and on May 9, 2022 his counsel asked Plaintiff’s counsel to stipulate to filing of the cross-complaint.
Code of Civil Procedure section 426.50 states,
“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.”
Code of Civil Procedure section 428.10 provides,
“A party against whom a cause of action has been asserted in a complaint or cross-complaint may file a cross-complaint setting forth either or both of the following:
(a) Any cause of action he has against any of the parties who filed the complaint or cross-complaint against him. Nothing in this subdivision authorizes the filing of a cross-complaint against the plaintiff in an action commenced under Title 7 (commencing with Section 1230.010) of Part 3.
(b) Any cause of action he has against a person alleged to be liable thereon, whether or not such person is already a party to the action, if the cause of action asserted in his cross-complaint (1) arises out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences as the cause brought against him or (2) asserts a claim, right, or interest in the property or controversy which is the subject of the cause brought against him.”
Code of Civil Procedure section 428.50 states,
“(a) A party shall file a cross-complaint against any of the parties who filed the complaint or cross-complaint against him or her before or at the same time as the answer to the complaint or cross-complaint.
(b) Any other cross-complaint may be filed at any time before the court has set a date for trial.
(c) A party shall obtain leave of court to file any cross-complaint except one filed within the time specified in subdivision (a) or (b). Leave may be granted in the interest of justice at any time during the course of the action.”
“A policy of liberal construction of section 426.50 to avoid forfeiture of causes of action is imposed on the trial court. A motion to file a cross-complaint at any time during the course of the action must be granted unless bad faith of the moving party is demonstrated where forfeiture would otherwise result. Factors such as oversight, inadvertence, neglect, mistake or other cause, are insufficient grounds to deny the motion unless accompanied by bad faith.” (Silver Organizations Ltd. v. Frank (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 94, 98–99.) “Permission to file a permissive cross- complaint is solely within the trial court's discretion.” (Crocker Nat. Bank v. Emerald (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 852, 864.)
Here, Defendant seeks to file a cross-complaint to allege causes of action against Plaintiff arising from the same transactions or occurrences that are the subject of the complaint.
Plaintiff hasn’t shown that Defendant has acted in bad faith in seeking to file the proposed cross-complaint.
Defendant has promptly pursued filing of the cross-complaint despite a brief delay during the outset of the case while Defendant was self-represented.
Therefore, the motion is GRANTED.
Moving Party to give notice.
Future hearing dates
9/9/22 - IDC
10/27/22 – (3) Mtn. to Compel Production
11/3/22 – (3) Mtn. to Compel Interrogs