Judge: Loren G. Freestone, Case: 37-2021-00048979-CU-OR-CTL, Date: 2023-12-29 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - December 28, 2023

12/29/2023  10:30:00 AM  C-64 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Loren G. Freestone

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Other Real Property Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2021-00048979-CU-OR-CTL JULIE A BONNETT AS TRUSTEE OF THE BONNETT FAMILY TRUST DATED JULY 29 1999 VS KATHLEEN L VAUGHAN AS TRUSTEE OF THE K VAUGHAN AND J CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

TENTATIVE RULING Defendant/Cross-Complainants Kathleen Vaughan and John Treadway (as trustees of the K. Vaughan and J. Treadway Family Trust dated 12/20/2011)'s motion for leave to file a first amended cross-complaint is GRANTED.

'The trial court has discretion to allow amendments to the pleadings 'in the furtherance of justice.' This discretion should be exercised liberally in favor of amendments, for judicial policy favors resolution of all disputed matters in the same lawsuit.' (Kittredge Sports Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 1045, 1047.) It is 'irrelevant that new legal theories are introduced as long as the proposed amendments relate to the same general set of facts.' (Id. at p. 1048.) Even when there has been unreasonable delay, 'it is an abuse of discretion to deny leave to amend where the opposing party was not misled or prejudiced by the amendment.' (Ibid.; accord Jo Redland Trust, U.A.D. 4-6-05 v. CIT Bank, N.A. (2023) 92 Cal.App.5th 142, 168.) The original cross-complaint sought both damages and indemnity based on issues with the installation of a PVC water line, and the proposed first amended cross-complaint relates to the same general set of facts. Although there has been some delay in seeking this amendment, Rusty Johnson Construction has not sufficiently established resultant prejudice.

The motion is therefore granted. Vaughan and Treadway shall file the proposed first amended cross-complaint within 5 days.

The court does not find that this amendment necessitates a trial continuance. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (a)(2).) Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3051838  33