Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 23STCV27437, Date: 2025-05-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV27437    Hearing Date: May 1, 2025    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Background

On November 8, 2023, Plaintiff Monique Scott filed a Complaint for Damages, alleging that she tripped and fell on a “parking reflector” at the premises located at 5670 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, California. Defendant LAZ Parking California, LLC answered the Complaint on July 11, 2024. Plaintiff subsequently served discovery defining the “parking reflector” as the condition that caused her fall and continued to rely on that description in discovery to other defendants.

On March 17, 2025, more than a year after filing the Complaint and fewer than two months before trial, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Errata to the Complaint. The notice purported to change the alleged dangerous condition from a “parking reflector” to a “black tar or rubber substance,” claiming the initial description was a “typographical error.” Plaintiff attempts to amend the alleged dangerous condition in the Complaint through a Notice of Errata rather than by filing a motion for leave to amend the Complaint. Defendant LAZ Parking California, LLC moves the Court to strike Plaintiff’s Notice of Errata. Defendant 5670 Wilshire Owner LLC joined LAZ in its motion. Plaintiff did not file an oppostion.

Legal Standard

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 436, the Court may strike from any pleading any irrelevant, false, or improper matter, or any part of a pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with California law. California law is clear that while a Notice of Errata may be used to correct clerical or typographical mistakes, it may not be used to make substantive changes to factual allegations. (See Flores v. Nature's Best Distribution, LLC (2016) 7 Cal.App.5th 1, 6; Falahati v. Kondo (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 823, 834.)

Discussion

The Notice of Errata filed by Plaintiff is not a proper correction of a typographical error. Plaintiff is not merely correcting a clerical mistake or a misstatement of a party’s name, date, or address. Rather, Plaintiff seeks to substitute an entirely different hazardous condition than the one alleged throughout the original Complaint and relied upon during discovery. This constitutes a substantive change in the factual basis for Plaintiff’s causes of action, not a minor correction.

In Dye v. Caterpillar, Inc. (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 1366, the Court held that when a party discovers new facts that require a change in the nature of claims or defenses previously pled, the proper procedure is to file a motion for leave to amend the pleadings under Code of Civil Procedure section 473. The present case is no different. Plaintiff's assertion that she now fell on a “black tar or rubber substance” instead of the “parking reflector” changes the alleged cause of injury. This is not merely surplusage or a typographical error, it is a change in the gravamen of the case.

Allowing Plaintiff to substantively amend her Complaint by filing a Notice of Errata, rather than following proper procedures, is improper and prejudicial to Defendant. Defendant would be deprived of the opportunity to oppose a motion for leave to amend and to receive a showing from Plaintiff explaining the timing, necessity, and effect of the amendment as required under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324.

Accordingly, the motion is granted and Plaintiff’s Notice of Errata to Complaint is stricken.

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’s 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.