Judge: Joel L. Lofton, Case: 22AHCV00928, Date: 2023-03-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22AHCV00928    Hearing Date: March 27, 2023    Dept: X

   Tentative Ruling

Judge Joel L. Lofton, Department X

HEARING DATE:     March 27, 2023                                   TRIAL DATE: No date set.

CASE:                         GARY LIVINGSTON v. SCOTT BROWN, an individual; PASADENA CENTER OPERATING COMPANY, a nonprofit corporation; PASADENA ICE SKATING CENTER, an unknown business entity; and DOES 1-20.  

CASE NO.:                 22AHCV00928

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

MOVING PARTY:               Plaintiff Gary Livingston

RESPONDING PARTY:      Defendant Scott Brown

SERVICE:                              Filed February 28, 2023

OPPOSITION:                       Filed March 14, 2023

REPLY:                                   Filed March 20, 2023

RELIEF REQUESTED

            Plaintiff moves for leave to file a first amended complaint to include a prayer for punitive damages.

BACKGROUND

             This case arises out of Plaintiff Gary Livingston’s (“Plaintiff”) claim that Defendant Scott Brown (“Brown”) used violence against Plaintiff during a hockey game. Plaintiff filed a form complaint on October 27, 2022, alleging two causes of action for (1) general negligence and (2) intentional tort against Defendant Scott Brown, Pasadena Center Operating Company, and Pasadena Ice Skating Center.

TENTATIVE RULING

            Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a first amended complaint is GRANTED.

LEGAL STANDARD

Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (a)(1), provides in relevant part:  “The court may likewise, in its discretion, after notice to the adverse party, allow, upon any terms as may be just, an amendment to any pleading or proceeding in other particulars; and may upon like terms allow an answer to be made after the time limited by this code.” Trial courts have discretion to permit amendments, which should be exercised liberally in favor of amendments to promote the judicial policy to resolve all disputed matters in one lawsuit. (Kittredge Sports Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 1045, 1047. “But this policy applies only [w]here no prejudice is shown to the adverse party.” (Melican v. Regents of University of California (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 168, 175, quotation marks omitted.)

DISCUSSION

             Plaintiff brings this motion to file a first amended complaint to add a prayer for the recovery of punitive damages. Plaintiff’s counsel provides he inadvertently missed checking the box for punitive damages. (Kahn Decl. ¶ 2.) In opposition, Brown argues that Plaintiff’s complaints fail to sufficiently allege facts sufficient to sustain a recovery for punitive damages. In reply, Plaintiff argues that none of the legal theories or facts are being changed and Brown has failed to establish prejudice if the proposed amendment is allowed.

            Because the present motion is to determine whether Plaintiff should be allowed to file an amended complaint, Defendant’s arguments regarding the sufficiency of Plaintiff’s allegations are unavailing.

CONCLUSION

            Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a first amended complaint is GRANTED.

             Moving Party to give notice.

Dated:   March 27, 2023                                 ___________________________________

                                                                                    Joel L. Lofton

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court indicating their

intention to submit.  Parties intending to appear are strongly encouraged to appear remotely.  alhdeptx@lacourt.org