Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 23STCV31278, Date: 2025-04-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV31278    Hearing Date: April 11, 2025    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On December 21, 2023, Plaintiff filed this dog bite case. Trial is set for June 20, 2025. Plaintiff now moves the Court for leave to file a First Amended Complaint to add a prayer for punitive damages and additional paragraphs relating to punitive damages. Specifically, the First Amended Complaint adds Paragraphs 18 through 31, Paragraphs 36 through 40, and prayer for damages item number 4. Defendant LR 9TH & BROADWAY LLC filed an opposition.

Legal Standard

When a party moves to amend a pleading, “courts generally should permit amendment to the complaint at any stage of the proceedings, up to and including trial. [Citations.]” (Melican v. Regents of University of California (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 168, 175.) In ruling on this type of motion, prejudice to another party is the main concern. (Hirsa v. Superior Court (1981) 118 Cal.App.3d 486.) The type of prejudice the court is to be concerned with should be something beyond simply having to cope with a potentially successful new legal theory of recovery that has been revealed during discovery. (Ibid.) Instead, the court should look for delays in the trial date, loss of critical evidence, extensive increase in the costs of preparation and other similar circumstances that create prejudice to another party. (Melican, supra, 151 Cal.App.4th at p. 176.) 

A motion to amend a pleading before trial must include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended pleading.¿ (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324, subd. (a)(1).)¿ A motion to amend a pleading must also be supported by a declaration which specifies the following: (1) the effect of the amendment; (2) why the amendment is necessary and proper; (3) when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered; and (4) the reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier.¿ (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324, subd. (b).)¿ 

Discussion

Plaintiff failed to comply with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324. Although a copy of the proposed amendment is provided, the motion is not supported by a declaration that specifies: (1) the effect of the amendment; (2) why the amendment is necessary and proper; (3) when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered; and (4) the reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324(b).) The provided declarations reference certain correspondence and deposition transcripts, but they do not identify the date or approximate timeframe when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered, nor do they explain why the request for amendment was not made earlier.

Accordingly, the Court denies the request for leave to amend without prejudice.

As to Defendant’s argument that the amendment should be denied as futile, although a court may deny leave to amend when the proposed amendment fails to state a cause of action (Foxborough v. Van Atta (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 217, 230–231), here, Plaintiff’s proposed allegations are not facially deficient. Defendant’s arguments are better suited for a properly noticed demurrer. (See Singh v. Lipworth (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 813, 828.) “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.” (California Casualty Gen. Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 274, 281.)

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.