Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 21STCV38312, Date: 2023-11-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV38312    Hearing Date: November 2, 2023    Dept: 27

Tentative Ruling

Judge Lee S. Arian, Department 27

HEARING DATE:     November 2, 2023                             TRIAL DATE:  February 1, 2024

CASE:                                Francisco Quintero, et al. v. HHS Construction, LLC, et al.

CASE NO.:                 21STCV38312

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

MOVING PARTY:               Plaintiff Francisco Quintero

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.          INTRODUCTION

On October 18, 2021, Plaintiffs Francisco Quintero and Ciria Quintero filed this action against Defendants HHS Construction, LLC and Adrian Rendon (“Rendon”) for injuries arising from a motor vehicle collision.  Plaintiff alleges was driving in the course of his employment with HHS Construction at the time of the incident.

On April 7, 2023, Plaintiff filed this motion for leave to amend the complaint to add punitive damages allegations. 

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, subd. (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, subd. (b).)¿ 

            In ruling on a motion for leave to amend a pleading, 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.       DISCUSSION

Plaintiffs seek leave to file the proposed First Amended Complaint which add factual allegations in support a request for punitive damages.  Specifically, Plaintiffs explain that Rendon was legally intoxicated at the time of the incident.  These allegations were inadvertently left out of the Complaint.  As such, Plaintiffs contend it is in the interests of justice that leave be granted to file the proposed first amended complaint.¿  

Because the motion is unopposed, the Court finds no prejudice will result if leave is granted to file the amended pleading. 

IV.       CONCLUSION

            Accordingly, the unopposed motion is granted.  Plaintiffs are ordered to file the attached First Amended Complaint within 10 days of this order.

Moving party to give notice. 

Dated:   November 2, 2023                                      ___________________________________

                                                                                    Lee S. Arian

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

            Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that 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 matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.