Judge: Lynne M. Hobbs, Case: 23STCV24280, Date: 2024-05-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV24280    Hearing Date: May 8, 2024    Dept: 30

NIANI COBB-PHILLIPS vs ENERGY RENTALS, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, et al.

TENTATIVE

Defendant’s motion for leave to file an amended answer is DENIED without prejudice. Moving party is ordered to give notice.

Legal Standard

California Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (a)(1) provides, in relevant part: “The court may, in furtherance of justice, and on any terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading or proceeding by adding or striking out the name of any party, or by correcting a mistake in the name of a party, or a mistake in any other respect; and may, upon like terms, enlarge the time for answer or demurrer. The court may likewise, in its discretion, after notice to the adverse party, allow, upon any terms as may be just, an amendment to any pleading or proceeding in other particulars; and may upon like terms allow an answer to be made after the time limited by this code.”

Under California Rules of Court Rule 3.1324(a), a motion to amend a pleading shall (1) include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended pleading, which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous pleadings or amendments; (2) state what allegations in the previous pleading are proposed to be deleted, if any, and where, by page, paragraph and line number, the deleted allegations are located; and (3) state what allegations are proposed to be added to the previous pleading, if any, and where, by page, paragraph, and line number, the additional allegations are located.

Under California Rule of Court Rule 3.1324(b), a separate declaration must accompany the motion and must specify (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.

Discussion

Defendant seeks a court order permitting it to file an Amended Answer. Defendant argues that the answer erroneously named Energy Rentals, LLC as Defendant. Defendant argues that the correct Defendant is Clean Initiative, LLC, and the proposed Amended Answer corrects this error.

The motion is denied because it does not comply with California Rules of Court Rule Rule 3.1324.  It does not state what allegations in the previous pleading are proposed to be deleted, and where, by page, paragraph and line number, the deleted allegations are located, or state what allegations are proposed to be added to the previous pleading, and where, by page, paragraph, and line number, the additional allegations are located. CRC Rule 3.1324(a).

Further, counsel’s declaration does not specify (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.  CRC Rule 3.1324(b).

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s motion for leave to file an amended answer is DENIED without prejudice.