Judge: Mark C. Kim, Case: 21LBCV00067, Date: 2022-12-15 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21LBCV00067 Hearing Date: December 15, 2022 Dept: S27
Plaintiff, Tari L. Soderling filed
this action against Defendants, M. Theresa Salinas and the California
Department of Housing and Community Development for breach of contract, quiet
title, and declaratory relief. Plaintiff
alleges she owns the mobile home located at 6223 E. Golden Sands Drive in Long
Beach, Space 195 A&B. Plaintiff alleges
the subject mobile home is registered and titled with Defendant, California Department
of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”).
Plaintiff alleges she entered into
a written contract with Defendant, Salinas, pursuant to which the parties agreed
Salinas would assume temporary, non-physical, in-name-only ownership of the
subject mobile home so Plaintiff could purchase a second home within the
Belmont Shores Mobile Estates. The agreement
had a termination date of 10/30/19, and Salinas was obligated to then return
all interest in the subject mobile home back to Plaintiff. Salinas registered the mobile home as hers
with the HCD, and has refused to transfer the home back to Plaintiff, despite
the fact that the termination date of the contract has passed.
Defendant, when she filed her
answer to the complaint, also filed a cross-complaint. The cross-complaint includes causes of action
for breach of contract, declaratory relief, fraud, and unfair business
practices. The cross-complaint alleges
Plaintiff and Defendant were previously involved in a personal relationship, Plaintiff
owes Defendant money and has agreed to pay the money, and Plaintiff
fraudulently induced Defendant to sign the agreement that forms the basis of the
complaint.
a.
Relief Sought
Defendant seeks an order permitting
her to file an amended cross-complaint adding causes of action for conversion,
unjust enrichment, sanctions, and declaratory relief, as well as to add numerous
factual allegations to the cross-complaint.
Defendant provides evidence that she recently learned Plaintiff took
steps to place the title to the subject mobile home in her own name using
falsified documents. Defendant.
b.
Standard on Motion for Leave to Amend
The court may, in furtherance of
justice, and on such terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading. (CCP §§473 and 576.) Judicial policy favors resolution of all
disputed matters between the parties and, therefore, leave to amend is
generally liberally granted. Ordinarily,
the court will not consider the validity of the proposed amended pleading in
ruling on a motion for leave since grounds for a demurrer or motion to strike
are premature. However, the court does
have discretion to deny leave to amend where a proposed amendment fails to
state a valid cause of action as a matter of law and the defect cannot be cured
by further amendment. (California
Casualty General Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 274,
281.)
The application for leave to amend
should be made as soon as the need to amend is discovered. The closer the trial date, the stronger the
showing required for leave to amend. If
the party seeking the amendment has been dilatory, and the delay has prejudiced
the opposing party, the Court has the discretion to deny leave to amend. (Hirsa v. Superior Court (1981) 118 Cal.App.3d
486, 490.) Prejudice exists where the
amendment would require delaying the trial, resulting in loss of critical
evidence, or added costs of preparation such as an increased burden of
discovery. (Magpali v. Farmers Group,
Inc. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 471, 486-488.)
c.
Analysis
Defendant’s motion fully complies
with CRC 3.1324, which provides the procedural rules for leave to amend. Any opposition to the motion was due on or before
12/02/22. The Court has not received opposition
to the motion. In light of the liberal
standard in favor of leave to amend, and in light of the lack of opposition, the
motion is granted.
Defendant is ordered to file a
separate copy of her FACC within ten days.
Plaintiff is ordered to file a responsive pleading within the statutory
time thereafter.
Defendant is ordered to give notice.
Parties who intend to submit
on this tentative must send an email to the court at gdcdepts27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as
directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department
does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the
tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed
off calendar. If a party submits on
the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify
the party submitting on the tentative. If any party does not submit on the tentative,
the party should make arrangements to appear remotely at the hearing on this matter.