Judge: Latrice A. G. Byrdsong, Case: 22STLC02024, Date: 2023-12-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STLC02024    Hearing Date: December 7, 2023    Dept: 25

Hearing Date:                         Thursday, December 07, 2023

Case Name:                             STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY v. LINDA RODRIGUEZ AKA LINDA BERTA DIAZ; and DOES 1 through 5, inclusive.

Case No.:                                22STLC02024

Motion:                                   Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint

Moving Party:                         Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Responding Party:                   None

Notice:                                    OK

Tenttaive Ruling:                    Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance’s Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint Dismiss is GRANTED.

SERVICE: 

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300)                      OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a)                                      OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b))                       OK 

OPPOSITION:          None filed as of November 29, 2023              [   ] Late          [X] None 

REPLY:                     None filed as of November 29, 2023              [   ] Late          [X] None 

BACKGROUND

On March 29, 2022, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. (“State Farm”) filed its complaint against Defendant Linda Rodriguez AKA Linda Berta Diaz (“Linda”) and DOES 1 through 5 (“DOES”) for damages in the sum for $2,382.72 and other cost based on a motor vehicle accident which took place on October 12, 2021.

On October 18, 2022, State Farm amended its complaint to correct the fictitious name of Defendant Doe I to Moneah S. McDaniel (“McDaniel”).

On December 19, 2022, the Clerk entered a default against Defendant McDaniel.

On December 22, 2022, Defendant Linda filed her answer.

On September 15, 2023, State Farm filed the instant motion for leave to amend to file a first amended complaint.   

On November 07, 2023, State Farm moved to dismiss Defendant Linda. The Court granted that dismissal with prejudice.   

MOVING PARTY POSITION

            State Farm moves the Court for permission to amend its complaint to include $5,086.24 State Farm paid to its insured subsequently after filing the action minus $1,000.00 paid by Defendant Linda from a settlement between the parties. State Farm additionally seeks to omit Defendant Linda from the complaint and include Moneah S. McDaniel as a named Defendant.

OPPOSITION

             No opposition has been filed.

REPLY

            No reply has been filed.

ANALYSIS

I.          Legal Standard

Leave to amend is permitted under the Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (a) and section 576. The policy favoring amendment and resolving all matters in the same dispute is “so strong that it is a rare case in which denial of leave to amend can be justified. . ..” “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 [citations], 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 (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 471, 487.)  

A motion for leave to amend a pleading must also comply with the procedural requirements of California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324, which requires a supporting declaration to set forth explicitly what allegations are to be added and where, and explicitly stating what new evidence was discovered warranting the amendment and why the amendment was not made earlier. The motion must also include (1) a copy of the proposed and numbered amendment, (2) specifications by reference to pages and lines the allegations that would be deleted and added, and (3) a declaration specifying the effect, necessity and propriety of the amendments, date of discovery and reasons for delay. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subds. (a), (b).)

II.        Discussion

State Farm seeks leave to file an amended complaint including $5,086.24 that State Farm paid to its insured subsequently after filing its complaint minus a $1,000.00 settlement payment previously paid by Defendant Linda. State Farm additionally seeks to omit Defendant Linda from the complaint and include Moneah S. McDaniel as a Defendant. (Joseph Pleasant Decl. ¶¶ 2-3.)

 Here, State Farm provides a copy of the proposed First Amended Complaint with a supporting declaration stating the reason why State Farm seeks leave to amend. (Pleasant Decl., Ex. A.) State Farm additionally provides the Court with a table specifying, by reference to the pages and lines, the parts of the complaint it seeks to add and remove. (Pleasant Decl. ¶ 6.) Counsel for State Farm states that the motion to amend is because of changing circumstances specifically that since filing the action, “[State Farm] paid an additional $5,086.24 to [its] insured pursuant to the insured’s Uninsured Motorist Bodily Injury (UMBI) coverage, for injuries [the] insured sustained in the [collision.] Plaintiff also settled with Defendant Linda … for the sum of $1,000.00.” (Id. ¶ 3.) As a result of these developments, State Farm seeks to amend its complaint to include those changes as well as others provided in its amended complaint. (Id. ¶ 4.)

Thus, because State Farm has sufficiently met the requirements of Rule 3.1324, the motion for leave to amend is GRANTED.

III.       Conclusion

             Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint is GRANTED.  Plaintiff is ordered to file the First Amended Complaint within 10 days of this Court’s ruling.

Moving Party is ordered to give notice.