Judge: Monica Bachner, Case: 20STCV00965, Date: 2023-02-06 Tentative Ruling

Department 71: Attorneys who elect to submit on these published tentative rulings, without making an appearance at the hearing, may so notify the Court by communicating this to the Department's staff at (213) 830-0771 before the set hearing time.  See, e.g., CRC Rule 324(b).   All parties are otherwise encouraged to appear by Court Call for all matters.

Case Number: 20STCV00965    Hearing Date: February 6, 2023    Dept: 71

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 71

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant Goldenvoice LLC’s unopposed motion for leave to file a first amended cross-complaint is granted.

Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant Goldenvoice LLC (“Goldenvoice”) (“Cross-Complainant”) moves unopposed for leave to file a first amended cross-complaint (“FACC”) in this action. (Notice of Motion, pgs. 1-2; C.C.P. §473; C.R.C., Rule 3.1324(a).)   Specifically, the FACC will: (1) add BMW Nationwide Security, Inc. as a named Cross-Defendant in the FACC’s third cause of action for contribution; (2) add BMW Nationwide Security, Inc. as a named Cross-Defendant in the fifth cause of action for contractual indemnity; (3) add a new sixth cause of action for contractual indemnity as to Cross-Defendants, BMW Nationwide Security, Inc. and DOES 26-50, inclusive; (4) designate the original sixth cause of action for breach of contract as the seventh cause of action; (5) add an eighth cause of action for breach of contract for third-party beneficiary against Cross-Defendant BMW Nationwide Security, Inc., and Does 26-50, inclusive; (6) designate the original seventh cause of action for declaratory relief as the ninth cause of action; (7) add a tenth cause of action for declaratory relief- duty to defend as to Cross-Defendant BMW Nationwide Security, Inc., and Does 26-50, inclusive; (8) designate the original eighth cause of action for declaratory relief-duty to indemnify as the eleventh cause of action; and (9) add a twelfth cause of action for declaratory relief- duty to defend as to Cross-Defendant BMW Nationwide Security, Inc., and Does 26-50, inclusive.

Background

On January 8, 2020, Plaintiff filed her initial complaint against Defendants Al Malaikah Auditorium Company (“AMAC”), Goldenvoice, and Staff Pro, Inc. (“Staff Pro”) alleging causes of action for (1) general negligence, and (2) premises liability arising from Plaintiff’s trip-and-fall incident (“Incident”).  On March 2, 2020, Goldenvoice filed its initial cross-complaint against Defendant Staff Pro alleging eight causes of action: (1) comparative indemnity and apportionment of fault; (2) total equitable indemnity, (3) contribution, (4) declaratory relief, (5) contractual indemnity as to Staff Pro, (6) breach of contract as to Staff Pro, (7) declaratory relief-duty to defend as to Staff Pro, and (8) declaratory relief-duty to indemnify as to Staff Pro.  (See Goldenvoice CC.)  On May 19, 2022, Goldenvoice filed the instant motion.  On May 31, 2022, this case was subject to an automatic stay for bankruptcy proceedings as to BMW Nationwide Security, Inc.  On October 25, 2022, Goldenvoice and AMAC were granted their motion for relief from the automatic stay.  On January 30, 2023, Goldenvoice filed its notice of Non-opposition of Cross-Defendant Staff Pro.

Motion for Leave to Amend

“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.”  (C.C.P. §473(a)(1).)

“Trial courts are vested with the discretion to allow amendments to pleadings ‘in furtherance of justice.’ That trial courts are to liberally permit such amendments, at any stage of the proceeding, has been established policy in this state since 1901.”  (Hirsa v. Superior Court (1981) 118 Cal.App.3d 486, 488-489.)

C.R.C. Rule 3.1321(a) requires that a motion to amend must: “[i]nclude a copy of the proposed . . . amended pleading . . . [and] state what allegations in the previous pleading are proposed to be [deleted and/or added], if any, and where, by page, paragraph, and line number, the [deleted and/or additional] allegations are located.”

C.R.C. Rule 3.1324(b) provides, as follows: “[a] separate declaration must accompany the motion and must specify: (1) [t]he effect of the amendment; (2) [w]hy the amendment is necessary and proper; (3) [w]hen the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered; and (4) [t]he reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier.”

Goldenvoice’s motion complies with C.R.C. Rule 3.1324(a).  The motion includes a copy of the proposed FACC.  (Decl. of Melo ¶2, Exh. A [FACC].)  Goldenvoice’s motion sets forth the allegations proposed to be added against Cross-Defendants and where, by page, paragraph, and line number, the additional allegations are located.  (C.R.C. Rule 3.1324(a)(3); Notice of Motion, pgs. 2-8; see Decl. of Melo ¶2, Exh. B.)

Goldenvoice’s motion substantially complies with C.R.C. Rule 3.1324(b).  Goldenvoice submitted a separate declaration of its counsel that specifies the effect of the amendment and explains why the amendments are necessary and proper.  (Decl. of Melo ¶¶12-13.)  Goldenvoice asserts the amendments are necessary because (1) it learned during discovery that a BMW employee was stationed in the area of Opera Box H on the night of the Incident, (2) pursuant to the BMW Subcontract Goldenvoice is entitled to defense and indemnity from BMW as a third-party beneficiary to the subcontract, and (3) Plaintiff as alleged and testified at deposition that the security guard’s negligence caused her injury.  (Motion, pgs. 15-16; Decl. of Melo ¶¶8, 13.)  Goldenvoice asserts the facts supporting the proposed FACC were not discovered until the March 23, 2022, Deposition of Staff Pro’s Person Most Knowledgeable, Kerry Lewis.  (Motion, pg. 14; Decl. of Melo ¶15.)

The Court finds Cross-Defendants will not be substantially prejudiced by the amendment and Plaintiff is entitled to an order granting leave to amend.

There is no evidence of significant delay considering Goldenvoice’s motion was timely made on May 19, 2022, the amendments are based on testimony obtained on March 23, 2022, moving party obtained relief from the automatic stay on October 31, 2022 and promptly moved to advance the hearing, and the case is scheduled for trial on June 12, 2023.

Based on the foregoing, Goldenvoice’s unopposed motion for leave to file an FACC is granted.

Dated:  February _____, 2023

Hon. Monica Bachner

Judge of the Superior Court