Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 23AHCV00759, Date: 2024-04-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23AHCV00759    Hearing Date: April 4, 2024    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - NORTHEAST DISTRICT

          On April 4, 2023, plaintiff Regina Martinez filed this action against Roes 1 through 10. Plaintiff brings this action for violations of the California Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act (“ICRAA”), Civil Code §§ 1786, et seq. and alleges that the unnamed Defendants violated the ICRAA in or around August of 2022 by unlawfully furnishing an investigative consumer report regarding Plaintiff “in a circumstance not authorized by the ICRAA, nor authorized by Plaintiff, and including information in the investigative consumer report that antedated the report by more than seven years.” (Compl., ¶¶ 3, 14.) 

          On December 22, 2023, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint naming Refinitive, Ltd. dba LSEG World-Check (“Refinitive”) as a defendant. On March 4, 2024, Plaintiff attempted to file a second amended complaint (“SAC”). The filing was rejected because Plaintiff failed to seek leave of court and there was no stipulation between the parties allowing the filing of the amended pleading.

Therefore, on March 12, 2024, Plaintiff filed this motion seeking leave to file her proposed SAC. On March 14, 2024, the parties filed a stipulation in which they agreed that Refinitive would not oppose this motion for leave to amend in exchange for a deadline to respond to the operative pleading, whether it is the FAC or SAC.

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.  (Cal. 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. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 1.324(b).)

Plaintiff’s counsel, Christian Schreiber, declares that after filing this action, Plaintiff was able to identify Refinitiv as a defendant by deposing Paula Tavera on October 3, 2023, as the person most qualified for nonparty Citibank, N.A. (“Citibank”). Counsel attaches a copy of the proposed SAC as well as a redlined copy. The documents show that Plaintiff seeks to add: (1) a claim for public injunctive relief under Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq. (“UCL”) against Citibank, (2) a claim for invasion of privacy against Refinitiv, and (3) additional allegations to support these two claims. (Schreiber Decl., Exs. A-B.) These new claims and allegations arise from the factual predicate underlying the initial complaint. Therefore, allowing the amendment would not prejudice the only named defendant, Refinitiv. In addition, Refinitiv has agreed not to oppose this motion for leave to amend.

Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to file the SAC within 5 days of the date of this Order.

Moving party to give notice.

Dated this 4th day of April 2024

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at ALHDEPT3@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter. Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue. If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.