Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 23STCV21465, Date: 2023-11-22 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV21465 Hearing Date: November 22, 2023 Dept: 47
Tentative Ruling
Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47
HEARING DATE: November 22, 2023 TRIAL DATE: NOT
SET
CASE: Omar Penagos Lozada v. Miguel Victoria,
et al.
CASE NO.: 23STCV21465 
MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Omar Penagos Lozada, in pro per.
RESPONDING PARTY(S): Defendants Miguel
Victoria and Alexandria Mujica
CASE
HISTORY:
·
09/07/23: Complaint filed.
·
09/14/23: First Amended Complaint filed.
STATEMENT
OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:
This is a quiet title action. Plaintiff seeks to rescind a trustee sale
that he alleges was improperly executed against his home.
Plaintiff moves for leave to file a
Second Amended Complaint.
TENTATIVE RULING:
Plaintiff moves for leave to file a
Second Amended Complaint.
The Court may, “in its discretion,
after notice to the adverse party, allow, upon any terms as may be just, an
amendment to any pleading or proceeding in other particulars.” (Code Civ. Proc.
§ 473(a)(1); see also § 576.) A motion to amend a pleading before trial must
meet the following requirements:
(a)
Contents of motion
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.
(b)
Supporting declaration
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.) This discretion should be
exercised liberally in favor of amendments, for judicial policy favors
resolution of all disputed matters in the same lawsuit.” (Kittredge
Sports Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 1045, 1047.)
Plaintiff
included a clean copy of the proposed Second Amended Complaint with the moving
papers, as required by Rule 3.1324(a)(1). Plaintiff has not specified, however,
which allegations are proposed to be added or deleted as required by Rule
3.1324(a)(2) and (a)(3). Nor has Plaintiff included a declaration setting forth
the information required by subdivision (b), and that information is not
facially apparent from the papers that have been provided. Although precedent
holds that discretion should be liberally exercised in favor of permitting
amendment, the Court cannot do so on such a meager showing.
Accordingly,
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint is DENIED. This
ruling is without prejudice to a procedurally compliant motion for leave to
amend.
Moving
Party to give notice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 22,
2023 ___________________________________
Theresa
M. Traber
Judge
of the Superior Court
Any party may submit on the
tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day
before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It
should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still
conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you
have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you
should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an
order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.