What is a Motion for Leave to Amend?

Useful Rulings on Motion for Leave to Amend

Recent Rulings on Motion for Leave to Amend

201-225 of 10000 results

BATTIKHI VS. NOBU NEWPORT BEACH

Thus, the demurrer to the fourth cause of action is sustained without leave to amend. Defendant to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

GILBERT-BONNAIRE V. DEMERJIAN

Code of Civil Procedure section 426.50, states, “A party who fails to plead a cause of action subject to the requirements of this article, whether through oversight, inadvertence, mistake, neglect, or other cause, may apply to the court for leave to amend his pleading, or to file a cross-complaint, to assert such cause at any time during the course of the action.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

KELLER, FISHBACK & JACKSON LLP VS SAMSON ROOFING AND CONSTRUCTION CORP., ET AL.

Leave to amend must be allowed where there is a reasonable possibility of successful amendment. (Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 348.) The burden is on the complainant to show the Court that a pleading can be amended successfully. (Ibid.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

LEGEND THIRTEEN 26 LLC, ET AL. VS DEFOND AVISARD TRUST, ET AL.

For the reasons stated above, leave to amend is denied. Ramyan and Poropat’s demurrer to the second cause of action is sustained without leave to amend. Lee & Associates’ motion to strike the prayer for punitive damages and related allegations is granted without leave to amend. Moving Defendants are ordered to file an answer to the complaint, with the subject allegations deemed stricken (against them only), within ten days. Moving Defendants are ordered to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

SEAN BROCKETT VS THE SALVATION ARMY, ET AL.

On March 24, 2020, the court sustained without leave to amend Defendants’ demurrer to the FAC as to the fourth and fifth causes of action, and overruled the demurrer to the first cause of action. In the FAC Plaintiff alleges that he was admitted to The Salvation Army Adult Rehabilitation Center in Long Beach on August 25, 2017 and successfully completed the program on February 28, 2018. He had been ordered by the Superior Court to seek voluntary rehabilitation.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JOMA LOGISTICS, INC. VS G&G LOGISTICS, INC., ET AL.

The court will hear from counsel for Plaintiff as to whether leave to amend is requested, and will require an offer of proof if so. 2. Defendant D/AQ Corporation dba Daum Commercial Real Estate Services’ Motion to Strike First Amended Complaint is DENIED as MOOT. Background Plaintiff Joma Logistics, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) alleges as follows: Plaintiff entered into a sublease with G&G Logistics, Inc. dba G&G Logistics, LLC, CA” (“G&G”) for a portion of the premises located at 347 Stimson Avenue (“premises”).

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ROSANNA ALVAREZ, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL. VS PAMA MANAGEMENT, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Accordingly, demurrer is SUSTAINED with 10 days leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

S&J BUILDERS AND RESTORATION VS BERMAN

Berman was dilatory in seeking leave to amend or that the cross-defendants will sustain the kind of prejudice that would warrant a denial of the motion. Therefore, the motion is granted. The Court will not address at this time the sufficiency or the merits of the new allegations. See Weil & Brown, Civil Procedure Before Trial § 6:644 ["Ordinarily, the judge will not consider the validity of the proposed amended pleading in deciding whether to grant leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

BRITTANY JELKS, ET AL. VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

Plaintiffs request leave to amend but failed to cure the defect from the last complaint, and do not explain how the defect may be cured now. Leave to amend is denied. Ruling The demurrer to the fifth cause of action is sustained without leave to amend. Next dates: Notice:

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge

    Maurice A. Leiter or Salvatore Sirna

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

BAAH V. FIRST DC INVESTMENTS LLC, A CORPORATION

Defendant’s (First DC Investments LLC) Demurrer to Plaintiff’s First, Second, Third, and Fourth Causes of Action in His Complaint (Demurrer), filed on 2-18-20 under ROA No. 39, is SUSTAINED with 14 days leave to amend. “A demurrer tests the pleading alone, and not the evidence or the facts alleged. . . .

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

ABELARDO MARTINEZ, JR., AN INDIVIDUAL VS EPIC GAMES, INC., A MARYLAND CORPORATION

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 11, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

BIRCH GOLD GROUP VS. ALEXANDER

Motion for Leave to Amend Tentative Ruling: Plaintiff, Birch Gold Group, LP’s Motion for Leave to Amend is GRANTED in part. Plaintiff has withdrawn its request to add a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty with punitive damages. (See Supplemental Decl. Rasheed ¶¶ 5-6.) The motion was timely made and there is no prejudice in granting the motion. The Motion also substantially complies with the CRC 3.1324. The Declaration of Fadi K.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

ISSA AL-BAYATI VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Court is persuaded that Defendants will not be meaningfully prejudiced by granting Plaintiff leave to amend. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is granted. (Atkinson, supra, 109 Cal.App.4th at p.761.) It is so ordered. Dated: August 11, 2020 Hon. Jon R. Takasugi Judge of the Superior Court

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ELDER OSVALDO GUTIERREZ VS LOCAL PIE, LLC, ET AL.

Lopez’ demurrer to Plaintiff’s sixth cause of action is SUSTAINED with leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

ANDREW TRAINES ET AL VS MATTHEW MANDEL

Code of Civil Procedure section 426.50 provides the standard for granting leave to amend where a cross-complaint is related to the underlying complaint. That section provides: “A party who fails to plead a cause of action subject to the requirements of this article, whether through oversight, inadvertence, mistake, neglect, or other cause, may apply to the court for leave to amend his pleading, or to file a cross-complaint, to assert such cause at any time during the course of the action.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

KIMBERLY BATTAGLIA VS KRAIG LAMONT GOLDEN, MD, ET AL.

Accordingly, demurrer is SUSTAINED with 10 days leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

STEVEN SMITH VS CANTWELL-ANDERSON

The demurrer to the second cause of action is also sustained with leave to amend. Conclusion Defendant Cantwell-Anderson’s Demurrer to the Complaint is SUSTAINED WITH 20 DAYS’ LEAVE TO AMEND. Moving party to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

RICHARD KINSELLA VS JOSE JESUS FLORES, ET AL.

Because Plaintiff concedes he currently lacks facts to support the punitive damages claim, leave to amend is denied. The ruling is without prejudice to Plaintiff’s right to file a motion for leave to amend if, during the course of the litigation, Plaintiff learns of facts that would support imposition of punitive damages against Gainer. Moving Defendant is ordered to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ANN E. AMIS, AS SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE HGS 1996 REVOCABLE TRUST, ET AL. VS CEDRIC L. WATKINS, II, ET AL.

The demurrer of the Moten Defendants[1] to the seventh, eighth, and twelfth causes of action in the SAC is SUSTAINED with twenty days leave to amend. Issue No.2: Fraud Causes of Action The Watkins Defendants assert that the second and eleventh causes of action in the SAC do not meet the heightened specificity standards required to assert a fraud cause of action.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

SUNSET HILLS CAR WASH INC VS GENERAL BARRICADE LLC

The Court granted the Motion to Strike as to the prayer for attorneys’ fees against Ryan without leave to amend and denied as to the prayer for punitive damages. On May 21, 2019, Sunset filed a Demurrer to the FAXC, which the Court sustained with leave to amend. On September 25, 2019, the Courts of Appeal issued a Remittitur as to General’s appeal of the granting of the preliminary injunction and affirmed the trial court’s ruling.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ALEXANDRO FILIPPINI, ET AL. V. TESLA, INC.

(2) Motion to Strike All of the allegations and prayers that are the subject of Tesla’s motion to strike are within and relate to causes of action for which the court sustains Tesla’s demurrer with leave to amend. The motion to strike is therefore moot. The court nonetheless expects that plaintiffs in filing their first amended complaint will address, to the extent appropriate, the issues raised in Tesla’s motion.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

LISA HERNANDEZ SOLIS VS. CAMERON KIEFER

If there is a reasonable possibility that a pleading deficiency can be cured, it is an abuse of discretion for the Court to deny leave to amend. (Blank v. Kirwan, supra, 39 Cal.3d at p. 318, 216 Cal.Rptr. 718, 703 P.2d 58.) Demurrers on the ground of uncertainty are disfavored and should only be sustained in the event the complaint is so vaguely and deficiently pleaded that the demurring defendant reasonably cannot intelligently respond to the complaint. (Khoury v.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

ROBERT MEADOWS VS. ANACAPA HOMES LLC

For the following reasons, the Court SUSTAINS Champion's general demurrer to the Fifth Cause of Action (Fraud) WITH LEAVE TO AMEND: (1) A cause of action for fraud must be pleaded with factual specificity concerning the details of the false misstatements or material omissions, intent to induce detrimental reliance, reasonable reliance, and resulting harm. (Wihelm v. Pray, Price Williams and Russell (1986) 186 Cal.App.3d 1324, 1331–1332, 231 Cal.Rptr. 355.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

WARREN VS. MURPHY

VERLADNER * TENTATIVE RULING: * The Verlanders’ demurrer to the Cross-Complaint is sustained, without leave to amend. If cross-complainants contest the tentative ruling to request leave to amend, they should appear at the hearing prepared to discuss in detail how they propose to amend and how the proposed amendment will solve the problems.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

  • Judge

    Burch

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

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

  « 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.