Judge: Thomas D. Long, Case: 22STLC06776, Date: 2023-08-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STLC06776    Hearing Date: August 29, 2023    Dept: 48

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On October 12, 2022, Hajoca Corporation filed this action against Infinity Plumbing Inc. (“Infinity”), Marco  Antonio Marquez, Maria Carmen Marquez, and Green Court Investors LP (“Green Court”).  On December 13, 2022, Green Court filed an answer and a cross-complaint against Infinity and Marco Marquez.  On February 21, 2023, Infinity and Marco Marquez filed an answer to Green Court’s cross-complaint.

On August 3, 2023, Green Court filed a motion for leave to file a first amended cross-complaint (“FACC”).

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).)

Green Court identifies the proposed amendments and provides a copy of the FACC.  (Adelson Decl. ¶ 5; Adelson Decl., Ex. A [“Proposed FACC”].)  Green Court seeks to add one cause of action against Infinity for violation of Business & Professions Code sections 7025-7034, 7114, and 7125.2.  (Adelson Decl. ¶¶ 3, 5(d); Proposed FACC at p. 10.)  Green Court’s recent investigation uncovered the factual basis for this claim after Infinity failed and refused to provide proper discovery responses and production of documents on this issue.  (Adelson Decl. ¶ 2.)

Infinity argues that this is a Limited Jurisdiction case, so the Proposed FACC cannot seek damages of nearly a half million dollars.  (Opposition at p. 3.)  On January 17, 2023, pursuant to a Notice of Related Case, the Court found that this case and Case No. 22STCV28077 are related, and it assigned the cases to this Department.  The Court’s docket indicates that this action was reclassified to Civil Unlimited.

Infinity opposes the motion by arguing the merits of the Proposed FACC.  (See generally Opposition.)  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.)

Infinity also argues that it will be prejudiced by “entirely new litigation” for “baseless claims.”  (Opposition at p. 10.)  But they also acknowledge that the case is not yet at issue.  (Opposition at p. 11.)  Trial has not yet been set and no depositions have been taken.  (Adelson ¶ 4.)  Because there is no showing of actual prejudice, the motion for leave to file an amended cross-complaint is GRANTED.  Green Court is ordered to file and serve the FACC within five 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 29th day of August 2023