Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 22NWCV01752, Date: 2024-03-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22NWCV01752    Hearing Date: March 26, 2024    Dept: C

James Shayler vs RG SG Market LLC

Case No.: 22NWCV01752

Hearing Date: March 26, 2024 @ 9:30 AM

#6

Tentative Ruling

Defendant RG SG Market LLC’s Motion for Leave to file a Cross-Complaint is GRANTED.

Moving party to give notice.

Background

This is a case arising out of an alleged ADA violation.

Plaintiff James Shayler filed the action on December 29, 2022, for violations of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code § 51, et seq.

On September 21, 2023, Defendant RG SG Market LLC filed a Motion for Leave to File a Cross-Compliant.

As of March 18, 2024, no opposition has been filed.

Legal Standard

C.C.P. §426.30(a) provides, as follows: “Except as otherwise provided by statute, if a party against whom a complaint has been filed and served fails to allege in a cross-complaint any related cause of action which (at the time of serving his answer to the complaint) he has against the plaintiff, such party may not thereafter in any other action assert against the plaintiff the related cause of action not pleaded.”

C.C.P. §426.50 provides, as follows:

“A party who fails to plead a cause of action subject to the requirements of this article, whether through oversight, inadvertence, mistake, neglect, or other cause, may apply to the court for leave to amend his pleading, or to file a cross-complaint, to assert such cause at any time during the course of the action. The court, after notice to the adverse party, shall grant, upon such terms as may be just to the parties, leave to amend the pleading, or to file the cross-complaint, to assert such cause if the party who failed to plead the cause acted in good faith. This subdivision shall be liberally construed to avoid forfeiture of causes of action.”

C.C.P. §428.50 provides, as follows:

(a) A party shall file a cross-complaint against any of the parties who filed the complaint or cross-complaint against him or her before or at the same time as the answer to the complaint or cross-complaint.

(b) Any other cross-complaint may be filed at any time before the court has set a date for trial.

(c) A party shall obtain leave of court to file any cross-complaint except one filed within the time specified in subdivision (a) or (b). Leave may be granted in the interest of justice at any time during the course of the action.

A cross-complaint is compulsory if it is transactionally related to the subject matter of the complaint. (C.C.P. §426.10.) “To be considered a compulsory cross-complaint, a related cause of action must have existed at the time of the service of [the] answer to [the] complaint.” (Crocker National Bank v. Emerald (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 852, 864.) The late filing of a motion for leave to file a compulsory cross-complaint “absent some evidence of bad faith is insufficient evidence to support denial of the motion.” (Silver Organizations, Ltd. v. Frank (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 94, 101.) “Permission to file a permissive cross-complaint is solely within the trial court’s discretion.” (Crocker at 864.)

Discussion

Defendant’s proposed cross-complaint is a compulsory cross-complaint. The cross-complaint arises out of the same “transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences” as the causes of action in Plaintiff’s complaint.  Specifically, Defendant argues that Defendant’s counsel discovered that one of the current tenants was responsible for the common areas of the premises where the alleged ADA violations occurred. As such, Defendant has potential indemnity and contribution claims against Cross-Defendant Chedraui USA that arise out of the common area of the premises. These causes of action existed at the time Defendant filed its answer. (CCP § 426.10.)  In the proposed cross-complaint, Defendant asserts cause of action against Cross-Defendant Chedraui USA for: (1) Express Contractual Indemnity; (2) Contribution and Equitable Indemnity; and (3) Declaratory Relief.

As this motion is unopposed, Plaintiff submits no evidence that they will be prejudiced or that Defendant is acting in bad faith.

Accordingly, Defendant’s motion for leave to file a cross-complaint is GRANTED.