Judge Ronald F. Frank, Case Number: 21TRCV00893, Date: 2023-05-11 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Ronald F. Frank, Case: 21TRCV00893, Date: 2023-05-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21TRCV00893 Hearing Date: May 11, 2023 Dept: 8

Tentative Ruling

HEARING DATE: May 11, 2023¿

CASE NUMBER: 21TRCV00893

CASE NAME: Lavissani, LLC v. Merona Enerprises, Inc., et al

MOVING PARTY: Defendant, Merona Enerprises, Inc.

RESPONDING PARTY: None.

TRIAL DATE: November 6, 2023

MOTION:¿ (1) Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint

Tentative Rulings: (1) Motion for Leave to Amend Cross-Complaint is GRANTED. The Cross-Complaint should be filed as a stand-alone document, not as an attachment or exhibit to another pleading like a motion for leave to file it.

I. BACKGROUND¿

A. Factual¿

¿¿

On December 10, 2021, Plaintiff Lavassani, LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant, Merona Enterprises, Inc. (“Defendant”), and DOES 1 through 10. On August 17, 2022, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint against Defendant alleging causes of action for (1) Breach of Contract; and (2) Fraud.

Now, Defendant Merona Enterprises, Inc. seeks leave to file compulsory cross-complaint, which counsel had intended to file together with the Answer to the amended complaint but for medical reasons was unable to do so back in February.

B. Procedural

On April 20, 2023, Defendant filed its Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint. To date, no opposition has been filed.

II. GROUNDS FOR MOTION

Defendant has made this motion on the grounds that it argues here is good cause for Defendant to bring various causes of action against Plaintiff and its predecessor-in-interest, that the motion is brought in good faith, and that it is in the interest of justice that the Court grant it.

III. ANALYSIS ¿

A. Legal Standard

Leave to amend is permitted under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (a) and section 576. The policy favoring amendment and resolving all matters in the same dispute is “so strong that it is a rare case in which denial of leave to amend can be justified. . ..” “Although courts are bound to apply a policy of great liberality in permitting amendments to the complaint at any stage of the proceedings, up to and including trial [citations], this policy should be applied only ‘where no prejudice is shown to the adverse party . . .. [citation]. A different result is indicated ‘where inexcusable delay and probable prejudice to the opposing party’ is shown. [Citation].” (Magpali v. Farmers Group (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 471, 487.)

A motion for leave to amend a pleading must also comply with the procedural requirements of California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324, which requires a supporting declaration to set forth explicitly what allegations are to be added and where, and explicitly stating what new evidence was discovered warranting the amendment and why the amendment was not made earlier. The motion must also include (1) a copy of the proposed and numbered amendment, (2) specifications by reference to pages and lines the allegations that would be deleted and added, and (3) a declaration specifying the effect, necessity and propriety of the amendments, date of discovery and reasons for delay. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subds. (a), (b).)

B. Discussion

Here, Defendant argues that it has acted in good faith with respect to the filing of the cross-complaint as it has attempted to expedite and move forward case proceedings. Defendant has attached the accompanying proposed Cross-Complaint to the Declaration of Ross T. Kutash. Defendant contends that the proposed Cross-Complaint contains only compulsory counter-claims within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure § 426.10(c) because it contains only claims for breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and declaratory relief, all relating to the same sale transaction and contract alleged in Lavissani’s Second Amended Complaint.

After review of the proposed Cross-Complaint, and the fact that this motion is unopposed, this Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion and allows filing of the cross-complaint.

Moving party to give notice.