Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 23STCV15836, Date: 2023-10-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV15836    Hearing Date: March 20, 2024    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend to file a FAC is GRANTED.

On 7/6/2023, Plaintiff Jill Belasco (Plaintiff) filed suit against Fountain of Wellbeing, Inc., Romie Chaudhari, and Unite4, LLC, alleging: (1) failure to pay wages; (2) waiting time penalties; (3) failure to reimburse business expenses, and violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200.

           On 2/20/2024, Plaintiff moved for leave to file a first amended complaint (FAC)

Discussion

           Plaintiff seeks leave to amend to file a FAC.

The proposed amendment would add factual allegations and causes of action related to (1) threats to hurt or kill Plaintiff and her family made by Defendant Chaudhari and Plaintiff’s emotional distress and other damages as a result of those threats, (2) defamatory statements made by Defendant Chaudhari against Plaintiff; (3) equity interest owned by Plaintiff in Defendant FWB, and (4) workplace hostile environment that Plaintiff was forced to endure during her employment at Defendant FWB. (Campbell Decl. ¶ 3, Ex. 2.) The proposed amendment would add four additional causes of actions based on the above allegations including (1) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, (2) Defamation, (3) Declaratory Relief, and (4) Sexual Harassment in Violation of FEHA (Campbell Decl. ¶ 3, Ex. 2.)

Plaintiff contends that “[t]he request for amendment was not made sooner because (1) there were hopes that the case would resolve early in litigation and (2) Plaintiff has substantial trepidation that Defendant Chaudhari is a very vengeful person and things could get worse for her if she were to bring claims other than the most basic claim for wages due. (Campbell Decl. ¶ 3 and Declaration of Jill Belasco (“Belasco Decl.”) at ¶ 5.)” (Motion, 3: 12-16.)

The policy favoring leave to amend is so strong that it is an abuse of discretion to deny an amendment unless the adverse party can show meaningful prejudice. (Atkinson v. Elk Corp. (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 739, 761.)

Here, trial is not until 8/18/2025, and litigation is in the earliest stages of discovery, as no depositions have been taken and only a few documents have been produced. Plaintiff’s motion is adequately supported by a proposed amended pleading and a substantive explanation as to why the new allegations are necessary, and why they were not alleged sooner. Accordingly, the Court finds no meaningful prejudice would result from granting leave to amend.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend to file a FAC is granted.

It is so ordered.

Dated:  March    , 2024

   Hon. Jon R. Takasugi
   Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.  If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar.  For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.