Judge: Teresa A. Beaudet, Case: 24STCV20389, Date: 2025-01-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV20389    Hearing Date: January 27, 2025    Dept: 50

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50

Background

Plaintiff Saleta Darnell (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on August 13, 2024 against a number of Defendants. The caption page of Plaintiff’s complaint lists causes of action for (1) negligence, (2) slander of title, (3) fraud, and (4) “special damages.” However, the body of the Complaint does not allege such causes of action (or any cause of action). 

Plaintiff now moves for “an order granting leave to file an Amended Complaint in this action.” The motion is unopposed.

Discussion

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (a)(1), “[t]he court may, in furtherance of justice, and on any terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading.” Amendment may be allowed at any time before or after commencement of trial. ((Id., § 576.) “[T]he court’s discretion will usually be exercised liberally to permit amendment of the pleadings. The policy favoring amendment is so strong that it is a rare case in which denial of leave to amend can be justified.” ((Howard v. County of San Diego (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1422, 1428 [internal citations omitted].) “If the motion to amend is timely made and the granting of the motion will not prejudice the opposing party, it is error to refuse permission to amend…” ((Morgan v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (1959) 172 Cal.App.2d 527, 530.) Prejudice includes “delay in trial, loss of critical evidence, or added costs of preparation.” (Solit v. Tokai Bank, Ltd. New York Branch (1999) 68 Cal.App.4th 1435, 1448.)

A motion to amend a pleading before trial must include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended pleading, which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous pleadings or amendments. (¿¿Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subd. (a).)¿¿ The motion must also state what allegations are proposed to be deleted or added, by page, paragraph, and line number. (¿Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subd¿. (a).) Finally, “¿[a] separate declaration must accompany the motion and must specify: (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 reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier.¿” (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324, subd. (b), emphasis added.)

Plaintiff states that she “seeks to amend the original complaint filed 8/13/2024 to include additional claims based on newly discovered evidence and to clarify existing allegations.”  (Mot. at p. 3:8-10.)

As an initial matter, the Court notes that Plaintiff’s motion does not comply with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324. The motion attaches a proposed First Amended Complaint as Exhibit “A.” However, Plaintiff does not “[s]tate 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, subd. (a)(3).) In addition, Plaintiff does not “[s]tate 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.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subd. (a)(2).) Plaintiff also does not provide any redlined version of the proposed First Amended Complaint showing the changes made to the original Complaint.

In addition, Plaintiff does not provide any declaration specifying “[t]he effect of the amendment,” “[w]hy the amendment is necessary and proper,” “[w]hen the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered,” or “[t]he reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subd. (b).) As set forth above, California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subdivision (b) is mandatory.

Lastly, Plaintiff states that the instant motion is made pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (See Plaintiff’s Notice of Motion.) The Court notes that pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 1, “[t]hese rules govern the procedure in all civil actions and proceedings in the United States district courts, except as stated in Rule 81…” The instant motion (and action) was not filed in a United States district court.¿Thus, the Court does not find that Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 15 is applicable here.  

Conclusion 

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint is denied without prejudice.   

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this Order.¿¿ 

DATED:  January 27, 2025                           

________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court