1) PLAINTIFF’S/CROSS-DEFENDANTS’/CROSS-COMPLAINANTS’ MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO AMEND CROSS-COMPLAINT TO SUBSTITUTE ROCKZILLA AS A DOE
DEFENDANT
TENTATIVE RULING: The Motion is DENIED. As an initial matter, moving party
failed to comply with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(a). The proposed amended complaint shows amendments as compared to the First Amended Cross-Complaint, which was stricken. The operative pleading is the original Cross-Complaint; any proposed amendment would be from the Cross-Complaint, as the previous pleading.
In addition, the Order Denying Ex Parte Application for Order of Dismissal filed May 30, 2018 required Cross-Complainants Callahan and Raja to verify any proposed amended cross- complaint. The proposed amended cross-complaint is not verified.
The Motion is also not supported by a separate declaration specifying when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered and the reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier. Without this