Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 23STCV09686, Date: 2024-09-19 Tentative Ruling
Counsel may submit on the tentative ruling by emailing Dept. 31 before 8:30 the morning of the hearing. The email address is smcdept31@lacourt.org. Please do not call the court to submit on the tentative. Please do not submit to the tentative ruling on behalf of the opposing party. Please do not e-mail the Court if you plan to appear and argue.
In deciding whether to submit on the tentative ruling or attend the hearing and present oral argument, please keep the following in mind:
The tentative rulings authored by this court reflect that the court has read and considered all pleadings and evidence timely submitted to the court in connection with the motion, opposition, and reply (if any). Because the pleadings were filed, they are part of the public record.
Oral argument is not an opportunity to simply regurgitate that which a party set forth in its pleadings. Nor, is oral argument an opportunity to "make a record" when there is no court reporter present and the statements and arguments of counsel are already part of the record because they were set forth in the pleadings. Finally, simply because a party or attorney disagrees with the court's analysis and ruling or is not satisfied with it does not necessarily warrant oral argument when no new arguments will be articulated.
If you submit on the tentative, you must immediately notify all other parties email that you will not appear at the hearing. If you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the motions. If all parties to the motion submit, this tentative ruling will become the final ruling after the hearing date and it will be memorialized in a minute order. This tentative ruling is not an invitation, nor an opportunity, to file further documents relative to the hearing in question. No such document will be considered by the Court.
**Tentative rulings on Motions for Summary Judgment will only be available for review in the courtroom on the day of the hearing.
Case Number: 23STCV09686 Hearing Date: September 19, 2024 Dept: 31
Tentative Ruling
Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 31
HEARING DATE: September 19, 2024 TRIAL
DATE: May 12, 2025
CASE: Liyun Wang v. Qingliang Zhao
CASE NO.: 23STCV09686
MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff
Liyun Wang
RESPONDING PARTY: No opposition
I. INTRODUCTION
On May 1, 2023, Plaintiff Liyun Wang initiated this action
against Defendant Qingliang Zhao a.k.a. Qing Liang Zhao for (1) Breach of Contract,
(2) Bad Faith Retention of Security Deposit, (3) Conversion, and (4) Unfair
Business Practices. Plaintiff leased a
residential property from Defendant pursuant to a lease agreement. The lease required the payment of a security
deposit of $14,000. In July 2022,
Plaintiff vacated the property.
Plaintiff alleges Defendant has improperly retained $12,905 of the
security deposit.
On May 21, 2024, Plaintiff filed this motion for leave to
file the First Amended Complaint.
The motion is unopposed.[1]
II. LEGAL STANDARD
The court
may, in its discretion and after notice to the adverse party, allow, upon any
terms as may be just, an amendment to any pleading, including adding or
striking out the name of any party, or correcting a mistake in the name of a
party, or a mistake in any other respect.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd.
(a)(1).)¿ “Public policy dictates that leave to amend be liberally granted.”¿ (Centex
Homes v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 23,
32.)¿ “Although courts are bound to apply a policy of great liberality in
permitting amendments to the complaint at any stage of the proceedings, up to
and including trial . . . this policy should be applied only ‘where no
prejudice is shown to the adverse party.’¿ [Citation].¿ A different result is
indicated ‘where inexcusable delay and probable prejudice to the opposing
party’ is shown.¿ [Citation.]” ¿(Magpali v. Farmers Group, Inc. (1996)
48 Cal.App.4th 471, 487.)¿
A motion to
amend a pleading must include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended
pleading which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous
pleadings or amendments and must state what allegations in the previous
pleading are proposed to be deleted or added, if any, and where, by page,
paragraph, and line number, the allegations are located. (Cal. Rules of Court,
Rule 3.1324(a).)¿ The motion shall also be accompanied by a declaration
attesting to the effect of the amendment, why the amendment is necessary and
proper, when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered,
and why the request for amendment was not made earlier.¿ (Cal. Rules of Court,
Rule 1.324(b).)¿
In ruling
on a motion for leave to amend the complaint, the court does not consider the
merits of the proposed amendment, because “the preferable practice would be to
permit the amendment and allow the parties to test its legal sufficiency by
demurrer, motion for judgment on the pleadings or other appropriate
proceedings.”¿ (Kittredge Sports Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 213
Cal.App.3d 1045, 1048.)¿ While the court may deny leave to amend where the
proposed amendment is insufficient to state a valid cause of action or defense,
such denial is most appropriate where the insufficiency cannot be cured by
further amendment—i.e., where the statute of limitations has expired or the
insufficiency is established by controlling caselaw. (California casualty
Gen. Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 274, 280-281,
disapproved on other grounds in Kransco v. American Empire Surplus Lines
Ins. Co. (2000) 23 Cal.4th 390.)¿
III. APPLICATION
Plaintiff seeks leave to file the proposed first amended
complaint to add new causes of action for violation of Penal Code section 496,
reformation of contract, and violation of Civil Code section 1632.
The motion complies with the requirements of California
Rules of Court, rule 3.1342(a). Further,
as the motion is unopposed, the court finds no prejudice will result if leave is
granted to file the amended complaint.
IV. CONCLUSION
The unopposed
motion for leave to file the First Amended Complaint is GRANTED. The First Amended Complaint is deemed filed
and served on this date. Plaintiff is directed
to separately file the First Amended Complaint within five court days of this
order.
Moving party to give notice.
Dated: September 19,
2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kerry Bensinger Judge of the
Superior Court |
|
[1] A failure to oppose a motion may
be deemed a consent to the granting of the motion. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.54(c).)