Judge: Serena R. Murillo, Case: 22STCV15476, Date: 2023-05-23 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV15476 Hearing Date: May 23, 2023 Dept: 31
TENTATIVE
Defendant’s/Cross-Complainant’s Unopposed Motion
for Leave to File a Second Amended Cross-Complaint is GRANTED.
Moving party to give notice.
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.)¿¿¿
Under California
Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, a motion to amend a pleading before trial must (1)
include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended pleading, which must be
serially numbered to differentiate it from previous pleadings or amendments;
(2) state what allegations in the previous pleading are proposed to be deleted,
if any, and where, by page, paragraph and line number, the deleted allegations
are located; and (3) state what allegations are proposed to be added to the
previous pleading, if any, and where, by page, paragraph, and line number, the
additional allegations are located. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(a).) A
separate supporting declaration specifying (1) the effect of the amendment; (2)
why the amendment is necessary and proper; (3) when the facts giving rise to
the amended allegations were discovered; and (4) the reason why the request for
amendment was not made earlier must accompany the motion. (Id.,
rule 3.1324(b).)¿¿
Discussion
On
October 28, 2022 Defendant/Cross-Complainant filed this instant motion seeking
leave to file a Second Amended Cross-Complaint.
Plaintiff
asserts that the First Amended Cross-Complaint contains
errors regarding the zip code of the attorney for the Cross-Complainant and the
name of the Cross-Defendant.
Plaintiff
filed a Notice of Errata on September 13, 2022 correcting the above mistakes
but the court clerk in rejecting the Cross-Defendant’s request for entry of
default stated that the Notice of Errata did not correct the errors. (See
Notice of Rejection submitted on 10/26/23.)
Until
the errors were noted by the court clerk, Plaintiff was unaware of the errors
in the Amended Cross-Complaint.
The
proposed Second Amended Cross-Complaint, as attached to the Motion, seeks to
correct the above two errors. (Vega Decl. ¶¶ 6-9, Ex. 1.) Cross-Complainant
asserts that the motion was promptly made, poses no prejudice to Plaintiff, and
was not brought in bad faith.
Therefore,
leave to amend the Cross-Complaint is GRANTED.
Conclusion
Defendant’s/Cross-Complainant’s Motion
for Leave to File a Second Amended Cross-Complaint is GRANTED. Second Amended Cross
Moving party to give notice.
Moving party is ordered to give notice.