Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 21STCV32500, Date: 2025-01-29 Tentative Ruling

Tentative rulings are sometimes, but not always, posted. The purpose of posting a tentative ruling is to to help focus the argument. The posting of a tentative ruling is not an invitation for the filing of additional papers shortly before the hearing.

Case Number: 21STCV32500    Hearing Date: January 29, 2025    Dept: 53

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles – Central District

Department 53

MOVING PARTIES:              Defendants Netsync Network Solutions, Inc., Jeffrey Barker, and Yong Kim                      

RESPONDING PARTY:       Plaintiff Amy Stearns

Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer

The court considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers filed in connection with this motion.

DISCUSSION

Defendants Netsync Network Solutions, Inc., Jeffrey Barker, and Yong Kim (“Defendants”) move the court for an order granting them leave to file an amended answer (1) to add “nor any protected activity” to their 11th affirmative defense for absence of substantial motivating reason, (2) to add an affirmative defense for mixed motive / same decision, and (3) to add an affirmative defense for alternative stressors.  Plaintiff Amy Stearns (“Plaintiff”) has opposed this motion, contending that Defendants delayed in seeking leave to amend and that she will be prejudiced by the proposed amendment.

The court finds that (1) it is in furtherance of justice to allow Defendants to amend their answer to revise the 11th affirmative defense and to add affirmative defenses for mixed motive / same decision and alternative stressors, and (2) Plaintiff has not shown that (i) Defendants unduly delayed in seeking leave to amend their answer, and (ii) she will be unduly prejudiced by the amendment, since Defendants have presented evidence showing that they litigated this action as if they had asserted the proposed defenses of mixed motive / same decision and alternative stressors (e.g., by asserting in discovery that Defendants terminated Plaintiff for legitimate reasons, as alleged in the mixed motive affirmative defense, and by questioning Plaintiff regarding other medical issues, which may support the alternative stressors affirmative defense).  (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 473, subd. (a), 576; Brookfield Decl., ¶¶ 3, 8; Brookfield Decl., Ex. 6, Def. Responses to Form Interrogatories, p. 5:11-14 [asserting that Defendants terminated Plaintiff based on her performance], and Ex. 7, Pl. Depo., pp. 152:14-153:3 [questioning Plaintiff regarding her mental health provider], 155:2-23 [questioning Plaintiff regarding her marriage counselor and whether she had seen any other medical or mental health provider]; Eng v. Brown (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 675, 701 [“‘The rule is that courts will be liberal in allowing an amendment to a pleading when it does not seriously impair the rights of the opposite party—and particularly an amendment to an answer’”].)  Moreover, to the extent that Plaintiff wishes to conduct discovery or designate experts on these issues, Plaintiff may file a motion to reopen discovery, to continue trial, or to seek any other appropriate relief.  (Boutros Decl., ¶ 8 [asserting that Plaintiff has not had an opportunity to retain an expert to assess the influence of external stresses on Plaintiff].)

For the reasons set forth above, the court grants Defendants’ motion for leave to file an amended answer.

ORDER

            The court grants defendants Netsync Network Solutions, Inc., Jeffrey Barker, and Yong Kim’s motion for leave to file amended answer.

The court orders defendants Netsync Network Solutions, Inc., Jeffrey Barker, and Yong Kim to file the “Defendants’ Amended Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint for Damages,” in the form attached as Exhibit 2 to the declaration of Michelle Brookfield, within 5 days of the date of this order.

            The court orders Defendants Netsync Network Solutions, Inc., Jeffrey Barker, and Yong Kim to give notice of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:  January 29, 2025

_____________________________

Robert B. Broadbelt III

Judge of the Superior Court