Judge: Thomas D. Long, Case: 20STCV36335, Date: 2024-08-08 Tentative Ruling



Case Number: 20STCV36335    Hearing Date: August 8, 2024    Dept: 48

 

 

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

VIRGINIA F AMBRIZ,

                        Plaintiff,

            vs.

 

PURE HOME REMODELING, INC., et al.,

 

                        Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO.: 20STCV36335

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT

 

Dept. 48

8:30 a.m.

August 8, 2024

 

On September 23, 2020, Plaintiff Virginia F. Ambriz filed this action.  Some Defendants have answered, some have defaulted, and some have been dismissed.  On July 11, 2024, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a first amended complaint (“FAC”).

The Court may, in its discretion and after notice to the adverse party, allow an amendment to any pleading.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (a)(1).)  A motion to amend a pleading must include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended pleading which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous pleadings or amendments and must state what allegations in the previous pleading are proposed to be deleted or added, if any, and where, by page, paragraph, and line number, the allegations are located.  (California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(a).)  The motion shall also be accompanied by a declaration attesting to the effect of the amendment, why the amendment is necessary and proper, when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered, and why the request for amendment was not made earlier.  (California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(b).)  The Court does not ordinarily consider the validity of the proposed amended pleading when determining whether to grant leave to amend.  (Kittredge Sports Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 1045, 1048.)

Plaintiff identifies the amendments and provides a copy of the proposed FAC.  Plaintiff seeks to remove a defendant and claim that has settled, correct names of defendants, clarify the alleged conduct for each defendant, and add one related cause of action.  (See Boortz Decl. ¶¶ 4-5, 8.)  Counsel recently realized that the Complaint does not make specific allegations against the now-named and defaulted Doe Defendants.  (Boortz Decl. ¶¶ 6-7.)  Trial has not yet been set.  No oppositions were filed.

Because there is no showing of prejudice, the motion for leave to amend the complaint is GRANTED.  Plaintiff is ordered to file her FAC within ten days.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMCDEPT48@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit.  If all parties in the case submit on the tentative ruling, no appearances before the Court are required unless a companion hearing (for example, a Case Management Conference) is also on calendar.

 

         Dated this 8th day of August 2024

 

 

 

 

Hon. Thomas D. Long

Judge of the Superior Court