Judge: Malcolm Mackey, Case: 20STCV08421, Date: 2023-05-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV08421    Hearing Date: May 1, 2023    Dept: 55

SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS v. REEVES    20STCV08421

Hearing Date:  5/1/23,  Dept. 55

#3:  MOTION TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT.

Notice:  Okay

No Opposition

MP:  Plaintiff

RP:  

Summary

On 2/28/20, Plaintiff SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS filed an eminent domain Complaint, alleging that the public interest, convenience and necessity require the acquisition of the property described, for the Turnbull Canyon Road Grade Separation Project in the City of Industry, as part of the Alameda Corridor-East Construction Project, intended to partially mitigate the impacts of increased traffic, which includes railroad crossing safety and efficiency improvements .

MP Positions

Moving party requests an order allowing leave to file a First Amended Complaint, on grounds including the following:

·         Plaintiff adopted a Resolution of Necessity, adding an additional acquisition area to the areas described in the original compliant on file in this action.

·         After the Original Complaint was filed, project designers identified facilities owned by Southern California Edison ("SCE") that would need to be relocated from the Project area and into a new area on the Property.

·         The new complaint merely adds a small additional area of 506 square feet for SCE to install facilities relocated out of what will be new roadway area.

·         Courts are entitled to grant motions to amend eminent domain actions. (City of Lincoln v. Barringer (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 1211, 1218 )

Tentative Ruling

The unopposed motion is granted.

Plaintiff may serve and file the proposed First Amended Complaint, as a separate document, within 10 days.

The Court finds that the subsequently identified facilities justify the pleading amendment to include limited property related to the same eminent domain project.

“If discovery and investigation develop factual grounds justifying a timely amendment to a pleading, leave to amend must be liberally granted.”  Mabie v. Hyatt (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 581, 596.