Motion to compel answers to special interrogatories
(3) when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered; and (4) the reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier.
Here, Plaintiff has substantially complied with the requirements for leave to amend under Rule 3.1324. Plaintiff seeks leave to amend to add new defendants and to add a cause of action to hold successor entities liable for the debts of the original defendants. Plaintiff contends that Plaintiff discovered additional facts that the Invoy Technologies is a forfeited by the California FTB. As such, Plaintiff seeks to hold its successor liable. Plaintiff argues that, at this time, the case is not at issue and the defendants have not been served such that granting relief will not cause prejudice.
Given the liberal policy to allow amendments, and given that no prejudice will occur, the motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to file the second amended complaint, attached as Exhibit1 of the motion, within 5 days of this order.
The court notes that this case was initiated on October 2, 2025. To avoid any further delay, the court sets an OSC re service of second amended complaint on defendants or dismissal on October 8, 2026.
The Case Management Conference is continued to October 08, 2026, at 09:00 am in Department C10.
Moving party shall provide notice.
42
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”