Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 22STCV08568, Date: 2024-01-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV08568    Hearing Date: March 21, 2024    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

EDGAR ESTURBAN, 

Plaintiff(s),  

vs. 

 

IRLANDA SANCHEZ, ET AL., 

 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

      CASE NO: 22STCV08568 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER FINDING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOOT 

 

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

March 21, 2024 

 

On January 3, 2024, defendant ZLS Trans Inc. (“ZLS”) filed this motion for summary judgment against plaintiff Edgar Esturban’s (“Plaintiff”) causes of action against it.   

 

Although not expressly stated, based on the timing, the motion for summary judgment appears to be directed at Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (FAC), which was filed May 18, 2022. After the Court granted in part the motion for judgment on the pleadings brought by Uber Technologies, Inc., Rasier LLC, Rasier-CA LLC (collectively, “Uber”), Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint (SAC) on March 8, 2024. The operative SAC pleads additional factual allegations against both Uber and ZLS, and incorporates these allegations into each cause of action against ZLS.  

 

A motion for summary judgment is shaped by the pleadings.  (See Laabs v. City of Victorville (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1242; Tsemetzin v. Coast Federal Savings & Loan Assn. (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 1334, 1342.) Further, an amended complaint supersedes all prior complaints. (State Compensation Ins. Fund v. Superior Court (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1124, 1130-31.)  The amended complaint furnishes the sole basis for the cause of action, and the original complaint ceases to have any effect either as a pleading or as a basis for judgment. (Id.)  Since there is but one complaint in a civil action, the filing of an amended complaint moots a motion directed to a prior complaint. (Id.) Accordingly, once an amended complaint is filed, it is error to grant summary judgment or adjudication on a cause of action contained in a previous complaint. (Id.) 

 

In this case, ZLS’ motion for summary judgment is necessarily to the FAC since the motion pre-dates the SAC’s filing. However, the operative complaint is the SAC, which has superseded the previous complaint.   

 

ZLS’ motion for summary judgment is thus moot. 

 

Moving party is ordered to give notice.   

 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: 

  • Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement. 

  • If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling,¿the party must send an email to the court at¿sscdept31@lacourt.org¿with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.¿ The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.¿¿ 

  • Unless¿all¿parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.¿ You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.¿¿ 

  • If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.¿ After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.¿ 

 

Dated this 20th day of March 2024 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court