HEARING ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE 1st Amended CROSS-COMPLAINT
FILED BY RONALD OZNOWICZ, SUSANNE K. OZNOWICZ
* TENTATIVE RULING: *
Defendants Ronald Oznowicz and Susanne Oznowicz’s motion for leave to file an amended cross-complaint is granted. An amended cross-complaint may be filed by August 24, 2020. The Oznowiczes are not required to file the exact proposed amended cross-complaint and instead may make changes to cause of action eight after considering Plaintiff’s arguments and the Court’s concerns. The Oznowiczes are not permitted to make substantive changes to any of their other claims.
There is “a policy of great liberality in permitting amendments to the complaint at any stage of the proceedings, up to and including trial [citations]…” (Magpali v. Farmers Group (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 471, 487.) However, leave to amend can be denied where there is “ ‘inexcusable delay and probable prejudice to the opposing party’… [Citation.]” (Ibid; see also, Kittredge Sports Co. v. Superior
Hearing Date
August 12, 2020
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
HEARING ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE 1st Amended CROSS-COMPLAINT
FILED BY RONALD OZNOWICZ, SUSANNE K. OZNOWICZ
* TENTATIVE RULING: *
Defendants Ronald Oznowicz and Susanne Oznowicz’s motion for leave to file an amended cross-complaint is granted. An amended cross-complaint may be filed by August 24, 2020. The Oznowiczes are not required to file the exact proposed amended cross-complaint and instead may make changes to cause of action eight after considering Plaintiff’s arguments and the Court’s concerns. The Oznowiczes are not permitted to make substantive changes to any of their other claims.
There is “a policy of great liberality in permitting amendments to the complaint at any stage of the proceedings, up to and including trial [citations]…” (Magpali v. Farmers Group (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 471, 487.) However, leave to amend can be denied where there is “ ‘inexcusable delay and probable prejudice to the opposing party’… [Citation.]” (Ibid; see also, Kittredge Sports Co. v. Superior