What is a Motion for Leave to Amend?

Useful Rulings on Motion for Leave to Amend

Recent Rulings on Motion for Leave to Amend

51-75 of 10000 results

RICHARD BRUN VS SPECIAL EVENTS STAFFING, ET AL.

Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED with 20 days’ leave to amend. IV.CONCLUSION Defendant’s Demurrer is SUSTAINED with 20 days’ leave to amend. Defendant’s Motion to strike is GRANTED with 20 days’ leave to amend. Moving party to give notice. Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at [email protected] indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ROYAL HOME HEALTHCARE AGENCY VS NOHO HOME HEALTH CARE ET AL.

Even if the court were to find that argument persuasive, it would in this case at best warrant the court treating the motion as a motion for judgment on the pleadings, and permitting leave to amend, which would not fully resolve the cause of action. The motion then broadly argues: “As detailed above, Plaintiff lacks sufficient evidence to support any of the allegations in the SAC. In turn, Plaintiff has failed to satisfy its burden that Ms.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

JACOB MIEROP CONSTRUCTION VS HART

., LLC's unopposed demurrer to the first cause of action for fraud and deception and the second cause of action for intentional misrepresentation against Hart, White and Nob is sustained, without leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

FAZIO V. FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CO.

The motion for judgment on the pleadings on the 32nd affirmative defense is granted without leave to amend, without prejudice to defendants seeking leave to amend to add affirmative defenses by motion for leave to amend later in this litigation. The motion for judgment on the pleadings on the remaining affirmative defenses is denied.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

DONALD F. GAUBE VS. JEFFREY W. JOHNSON, ET AL

Colburn (1977) 72 Cal.App.3d 544, 559, Plaintiff argues that Cross-Complainants are acting in bad faith and already filed a cross-complaint where a demurrer was sustained with leave to amend but Johnson dismissed the cross-complaint instead of amending.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

UNI-GLORY DEVELOPMENT, INC. VS. FAIRVIEW EAST LLC

The Court’s discretion regarding granting leave to amend is usually exercised liberally to permit amendment of pleadings. (Nestle v. Santa Monica (1972) 6 Cal.3d 920, 939.) If a 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 of Los Angeles County (1959) 172 Cal. App. 2d 527, 530.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

MICHAEL CHIMOUNEY VS MORDECHAI MOTY SULTAN

Whether Leave to Amend Should Be Granted The Court may grant leave to amend the pleadings at any stage of the action. A party may discover the need to amend after all pleadings are completed and new information requires a change in the nature of the claims or defenses previously pleaded. Such changes usually cannot be made on ex parte procedure. Rather, a formal motion to amend must be served and filed. (Dye v. Caterpillar, Inc. (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 1366, 1380.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ANNIE VOSKANIAN, ET AL. VS PATRICK ALEXANDER, ET AL.

Twenty (20) days leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

JAMES PICKRELL VS JAY JOHNSON, ET AL.

Course of Proceedings On January 31, 2020, the Court sustained Defendants’ demurrer to Plaintiff’s second cause of action without leave to amend. The Court also struck allegations in the Complaint relating to time-barred conduct. Legal Standard Courts have the authority to issue monetary sanctions, evidentiary sanctions, or terminating sanctions against parties engaging in misuse of the discovery process after giving the parties proper notice and the opportunity to be heard. (CCP § 2023.030.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

RODNEY MYERS JR ET AL VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

Walsh Shea filed this motion on the basis that its demurrer to Plaintiff’s complaint would surely be sustained without leave to amend. Plaintiff has since filed an amended complaint, rendering Walsh Shea’s demurrer moot. The court notes that Walsh Shea has since filed a demurrer and motion to strike to the amended complaint. Walsh Shea is, essentially, requesting the court to rule on these in ruling on this motion. The court declines to do so. Walsh Shea must respond to Plaintiff’s discovery.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

JOHN MORRIS, ET AL. VS MICHAEL HRICAK ARCHITECTS, A CALIFORNIA BUSINESS

Defendant Michael Hricak Architects’ Demurrer to the seventh cause of action is SUSTAINED with leave to amend; the demurrer to the fifth cause of action is sustained without leave to amend. The demurrer to the other causes of action is denied. 2. Defendant Jomar Construction, Inc.’s Demurrer to the eighth cause of action is SUSTAINED with leave to amend. Jomar’s Demurrer to the Fifth Cause of action is sustained without leave to amend. Defendant Jomar Construction, Inc.’s Motion to Strike is DENIED. 3.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • Judge

    Paul A. Bacigalupo or Virginia Keeny

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

SEBLE MULUGETHA, ET AL. VS ANTREAS HINDOYAN, ET AL.

The pleading continues to fail to sufficiently alleged this cause of action despite plaintiff having been permitted leave to amend with the input of the court on these issues. The opposition generally seeks leave to amend if there is a deficiency, but does not explain what could be added, when plaintiff has been previously permitted leave to amend this claim. The reply points out that the opposition does not point to facts showing how either element could is or could be sufficiently stated.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

BISAGNO V. RESOLVE DEFAULT SERVICES, LLC

The motion for judgment on the pleadings on the wrongful foreclosure cause of action is granted without leave to amend. TENTATIVE RULING # 11: DEFENDANT MERS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS ON ALL CAUSES OF ACTION IS GRANTED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. NO HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HELD (LEWIS V.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

ULRS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS DYNAMIC CLINICAL LABORATORIES, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Therefore, the Court SUSTAINS Moving Defendant’s demurrer to the third cause of action in the complaint with 20 days leave to amend. Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling. In consideration of the current COVID-19 pandemic situation, the Court strongly encourages that appearances on all proceedings, including this one, be made by CourtCall if the parties do not submit on the tentative.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION VS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

Kelsey-Hayes Co. (1972) 25 Cal.App.3d 442, the Second District held that the trial court had properly dismissed a claim based on implied warranty after sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend: “It is settled law in California that privity between the parties is a necessary element to recovery on a breach of an implied warranty of fitness for the buyer's use, with exceptions not applicable here. (Burr v. Sherwin Williams Co. (1954) 42 Cal.2d 682, 695-696 [268 P.2d 1041].)

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

TRACI CANTER, ET AL. VS MARC CANTER, ET AL.

With respect to the request to sustain demurrer without leave to amend, public policy favors a trial upon the merits, even when an action is filed in a court lacking jurisdiction. (See Morgan v. Somervell (1940) 40 Cal.App.2d 398, 400). As noted above, the Probate Department has concurrent jurisdiction over these causes of action. (Prob. Code, § 17000(b); see Estate of Bowles, supra, at 696.) Accordingly, the court orders Causes of Action One through Fifteen transferred to the Probate Department. Ii.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

DAHRED D HAGHVIRDI ET AL VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

Also, since Plaintiffs’ Motion/Petition for Relief From Government Code 945.4 is denied, the instant motion for leave to amend as to the State is moot. Therefore, the current motion seeks to file a pleading which contains improper allegations against the State. Based on the foregoing, the hearing on the Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint will be continued.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

DAVIS TRANSPORT, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL. VS CHRISTINE DAVIS

The demurrer was sustained to each cause of action with leave to amend. The Motion to Strike was deemed moot in light of the sustaining of the demurrer with leave to amend. Defendant Christine Davis then filed a demurrer and motion to strike in response to the First Amended Complaint. The matter was scheduled for hearing, and then continued, and was heard on July 10, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

SANAZ AFSAR, ET AL. VS WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.

The court takes a liberal approach when a party seeks to amend a pleading; generally, the court allows leave to amend a pleading so long as it is in the interest of justice. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 473(a)(1); Magpali v. Farmers Group, Inc. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 471, 487.) Denial is justified when there is “probable prejudice” to an opposing party, the amendment appears to be a façade or the pleading is legally defective and cannot be cured by an amendment. (Id.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

GILBERT WAYNE HEDGPETH, ET AL. VS CALIFORNIA STATE ATHLETIC COMMISSION, ET AL.

. _____________________________________________ Defendant California State Athletic Commission and Andrew Foster’s motion to strike is GRANTED with leave to amend. Plaintiffs Gilbert Wayne Hedgpeth (“Hedpeth”), Raul Caiz Jr. (“Caiz Jr.”) and Raul Caiz Sr. (“Caiz Sr.”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) are longtime boxing referees and judges who officiate professional boxing events.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

MICAELA LEYVA VS. KAREN BACA AN INDIVIDUAL

The Court in its discretion has considered the untimely papers only for the purpose of determining whether leave to amend will be permitted, and only with respect to the complaint brought by plaintiffs Micaela Leyva and Rafael Duran in the lease case, EC 064876. The court denies the motion as to the Leyva case and grants leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

DIAMOND DAVIS, ET AL. V. FRANK ROSE, ET AL.

Defendants’ demurrer to the fifth, sixth and ninth causes of action is sustained with leave to amend within 20 days. Defendants’ demurrer to the seventh cause of action for nuisance is overruled. Defendants’ motion to strike the claim for punitive damages is granted with leave to amend within 20 days. Legal Standard. “The function of a demurrer is to test the sufficiency of the complaint as a matter of law.” (Holiday Matinee, Inc. v. Rambus, Inc. (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 1413, 1420.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

GARY PATENT ET AL VS OLATUNJI BANDELE D V M ET AL

On October 26, 2018, the Court sustained Defendants’ demurrer, with leave to amend, as to the seventh cause of action, sustained, without leave to amend, as to Count Three of the first cause of action, the third, fourth, and sixth causes of action, and overruled the demurrer as to Count One and Count Two of the first cause of action, second cause of action, and fifth cause of action.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

ELVA CASTORENA VS JOHN VILLALOBOS, ET AL

The motion may be granted with leave to file an amended complaint, or without leave to amend, in which case, judgment may be entered in favor of the moving defendant. CCP § 438 (h).

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JOSEPH GIOVINAZZO, ET AL. VS ENCINO OAKS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT CORPORATION

Based on the foregoing, Prayer for reasonable attorney’s fees, page 6, lines 16-17 is stricken in its entirety with leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

  • Judge

    Paul A. Bacigalupo or Virginia Keeny

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.