Judge: Serena R. Murillo, Case: 21STCV37048, Date: 2022-12-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV37048    Hearing Date: December 14, 2022    Dept: 29

TENTATIVE

Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend is GRANTED.

Legal Standard

Code of Civil Procedure section 473(a)(l) provides, in pertinent part: "The court may, in furtherance of justice, and on such terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading ... "

"The policy of great liberality in permitting amendments at any stage of the proceeding was declared at an early date and has been repeatedly restated." 5 Witkin, California Procedure, Pleading, 5th ed. 2008, section 1194 (citing Nestle v. Santa Monica (1972) 6 Cal.3d 920, 939; Thomas v. Bruza (1957) 151 Cal.App.2d 150, 155. "If the motion to amend is timely made and the granting of the motion will not prejudice any party, it is error to refuse permission to amend…” Morgan v. Superior Court (1959) 172 Cal.App.2d 527, 530.

Discussion

Here, Plaintiff offers the names of the driver and owner of a 2011 BMW which Plaintiff alleges collided with her vehicle during the accident June 26, 2021. Plaintiff identifies the driver of the 2011 BMW as Calvenes Okeddl Baraza and the owner of the 2011 BMW as Salvatory Ochieng Baya. Plaintiff offers a proposed amended complaint which states a cause of action for negligence against the proposed new Defendants Baraza and Baya. King Decl., Ex. 2.

Plaintiff has shown good cause for amending her complaint. Defendants will not be prejudiced, and the motion is unopposed. Plaintiff counsel states he attempted to stipulate with Defendants Derek and Godwin to add the new Defendants, but despite numerous attempts he has not heard back from defense counsel. King Decl. ¶ 4; Ex. C. Therefore, the Court will grant Plaintiff’s motion.

Conclusion

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend her complaint is GRANTED. The Court accepts Plaintiff’s proposed first amended complaint, effectively filed as of the date of this order.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.