What is a Motion for Leave to Amend?

Useful Rulings on Motion for Leave to Amend

Recent Rulings on Motion for Leave to Amend

226-250 of 10000 results

NATALIE NGUYEN VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

TENTATIVE RULING: Defendant’s Demurrer to Plaintiff’s Complaint is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ZIXIANG "LEO" LIN,, ET AL. VS PALOS VERDES PENINSULA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, A CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL.

Defendants’ Motion to Strike Item 4 is granted with 20 days leave to amend. Plaintiff failed to set forth a statutory or contractual basis to support the request for attorneys’ fees. Defendants are ordered to give notice of this ruling.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

EDDIE WASHINGTON VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY, ET AL.

County’s demurrer to the seventh cause of action is sustained without leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

CESAR CRUZ VS CEDAR CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

SAIMIR A PRAPANIKU VS SASHA SHEV

Second, Plaintiff has not shown that his counsel’s failure to appear at the hearing caused the demurrer to be sustained without leave to amend. The court’s tentative ruling, before it was aware that Plaintiff’s counsel would not appear at the hearing, was to sustain the demurrer without leave to amend. Plaintiff’s counsel has not shown that he could have made any argument at the 2/6/20 hearing that would have resulted in a different outcome.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

HABEEBULLAH N. RASHEED VS SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ET AL.

Rasheed's complaint with leave to amend. Plaintiff has 10 days to amend the complaint. The court has read Defendant's "Rebuttal(sic) against the Defendants(sic) memorandum of points and authorities in support of demurrer to Plaintiff's complaint." Allegations of facts and legal theories stated in that document that are not part of the complaint cannot be considered for purposes of the ruling on the demurrer.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Judge

    Doug Mewhinney

  • County

    San Joaquin County, CA

CHRISTINE M. WEBER VS JAMES BRUCE TAYLOR

A motion for leave to amend can be denied if the moving party has delayed unreasonable in seeking to amend, or if the proposed amendment fails to state a cause of action. Id., Howard v. County of San Diego (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1422, 1428. Plaintiff argues there will be no prejudice to defendants if the motion is granted, since a trial date has not been scheduled, there are no new factual allegations in the proposed amendment and no depositions have been taken.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

PAMELA ISLAND VS TOMMY NGUYEN, ET AL.

Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint (“FAC”) on October 29, 2019 and on January 23, 2020, Defendant’s demurrer was sustained and their Motion to Strike was granted with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed the operative Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) on February 11, 2020. Defendant demurs to the SAC on the grounds that the Second Cause of Action for Willful Misconduct/Malice/Oppression fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action and fails for uncertainty.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Defendant Gao’s demurrer to the Complaint came for hearing on July 11, 2017, at which time the court sustained the demurrer to the first cause of action without leave to amend, and with 30 days’ leave to amend as to the second and third causes of action. Defendant Xu’s demurrer to the first cause of action of the Complaint came for hearing on August 3, 2017, at which time the Court sustained it without leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

ELOISA MELGOZA VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC

Accordingly, the Court sustains the demurrer on this ground with leave to amend. Seventh Cause of Action Defendant contends that Plaintiff fails to plead a claim under the CLRA because she does not allege actual reliance and actual damages caused by Defendant’s allegedly deceptive practices. (Demurrer at p. 9.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

D’ALESSIO INVESTMENTS, LLC VS CITY OF COSTA MESA

As this is the Plaintiff’s first attempt to plead, leave to amend must be granted. (See Cabral v. Soares (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 1234, 1240 (“Rarely should a judge sustain a demurrer to an initial complaint without granting leave to amend."); City of Stockton v. Superior Court (2007) 42 Cal.4th 730, 747.) Defendant is ordered to give notice of these rulings.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

ASHER ENTERPRISES LLC VS. FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE

T 8:30 a.m. 8/10/20 [TENTATIVE] ORDER: The Demurrer to the Second Amended Cross-Complaint is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. The Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED. The Motion to Strike is MOOT. Introduction Cross-Defendant Auction.com, Inc. (“Auction”) demurs to the Second Amended Cross-Complaint (“SAXC”) filed by Cross-Complainant Triloki Devjani (“Devjani”.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

IRENE MORENO VS CIRRUS ASSET MANAGEMENT INC

The demurrer is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND to allege an employment relationship between plaintiffs and the Insperity Defendants. 4th Cause of Action. Labor Code §§ 226 and 1198.5. Wage and Hour Violations. The demurrer is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND to allege an employment relationship between plaintiffs and the Insperity Defendants. 5th Cause of Action – Wage and Hour Violations.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

ALMANZA VS DESERT REGIONAL HEARING RE: DEMURRER TO 2ND AMENDED COMPLAINT OF MARIA ALMANZA BY DESERT REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTERINC, DESERT REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTERMEDICAL, TENET HEALTHCARE CORPORATION

Demurrer sustained without leave to amend as to the first and second causes of action. Demurrer sustained with 30 days leave to amend as to the third and fifth causes of action. Demurrer sustained without leave to amend as to the fourth cause of action.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

MEDINA VS. SUPER CENTER CONCEPTS, INC.

Demurrer to Complaint filed by Defendant Super Center Defendant, Super Center Concepts, Inc. dba Superior Grocers’ Demurrer to the sixth cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress in plaintiff’s complaint is SUSTAINED, without leave to amend, but without prejudice to amending the complaint to add a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress, if discovery reveals facts to support such a cause of action.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

DANIEL WILLSEY VS RATNER GLEASON INVESTMENT, LLC, ET AL.

On November 26, 2019, the demurrer as to the second cause of action for malicious prosecution was sustained without leave to amend. (11/26/19 Minute Order.) However, Plaintiff was granted 30 days’ leave to amend as to the first and fourth causes of action for abuse of process and breach of contract. (11/26/19 Minute Order.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

SHAHROOZ BIGONAH VS MARKET PHARMACY, ET AL.

Based on the foregoing, Defendant Market Pharmacy’s demurrer to the complaint is SUSTAINED with leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

  • Judge

    Paul A. Bacigalupo or Virginia Keeny

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

JPMORGAN CHASE BAK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION VS YOUNG C CHO ET AL

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 (1959) 172 Cal.App.2d 527, 530.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

CROSS TREE HOLDINGS LLC VS SEIYA INC ET AL

Because it is dependent on a valid indemnification cause of action, the demurrer to the first cause of action is sustained with leave to amend. The Court SUSTAINS the demurrer to the first and second cause of action with 15 days’ leave to amend. The Court SUSTAINS the demurrer without leave to amend as to the third cause of action.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

THOMAS PARTNERS STRATEGIES, A CALIFORNIA LLC, ET AL. VS ROBERT BENJAMIN BUZZ PATTERSON, ET AL.

Accordingly, the motion to strike the prayer for punitive damages and the prayer for attorney fees associated with the tort causes of action is GRANTED with leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

GOLDEN RAIN FOUNDATION OF LAGUNA WOODS V. DICKINSON

In requesting leave to amend, Dickinson only states that “several additional accusations and claims shall be added herewith.” He does not elaborate any further. Because Cross-Complainant has already had several opportunities to amend his pleading and fails to articulate how it can be amended to state sufficient facts to support his allegations against the moving defendants, leave to amend is denied. Cross-Defendants’ request for sanctions pursuant to Code Civ. Proc., § 128.7 is denied.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

PLUMMER V. ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF FRESNO THRIFT BOUTIQUE

The court agrees, in principal, but nonetheless grants leave to amend for the reasons stated below. (Virginia G. v. ABC Unified School Dist. (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 1848, 1852 [“Where a . . . motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted as to the original complaint, denial of leave to amend constitutes an abuse of discretion if the pleading does not show on its face that it is incapable of amendment.”].)

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

AAS DESIGN, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS CRENSHAW INVESTORS, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

Plaintiff is granted 20 days leave to amend from this date. Defendant is to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

RISDANA VS. FARRELL

Thus, the demurrer is sustained without leave to amend. Moving party to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

PETROS MB, INC., ET AL. VS CENTURY CITY MALL, LLC

A demurrer should not be sustained without leave to amend if the complaint, liberally construed, can state a cause of action under any theory or if there is a reasonable possibility the defect can be cured by amendment. (Schifando v. City of Los Angeles, supra, 31 Cal.4th at p. 1081.) The demurrer also may be sustained without leave to amend where the nature of the defects and previous unsuccessful attempts to plead render it probable plaintiff cannot state a cause of action. (Krawitz v.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  « first    1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 400     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.