DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26CV-00012·merced·Civil·Civil
Hearing todayDENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Bruce Austin vs Infinity Management and Investments, LLC, et al.

Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint

Hearing date
Aug 18, 2026
Department
12
Prevailing
Opposing Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffBruce Austin
DefendantInfinity Management and Investments, LLC

Ruling

Civil Law and Motion/Petition Name Change Hon. Jennifer O Trimble Courtroom 12

1159 G Street, Los Banos

Tuesday, August 18, 2026 1:30 p.m.

The following tentative rulings shall become the ruling of the court unless a party gives notice of intention to appear as follows: 1. You must call (209) 725-4240 to notify the court of your intent to appear.

2. You must give notice to all other parties before 4:00 p.m. of your intent to appear. Per California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(a)(1), failure to do both items 1 and 2 will result in no oral argument. Note: Notifying CourtCall (the court’s telephonic appearance provider) of your intent to appear does not satisfy the requirement of notifying the court.

Case No. Title / Description

26CV-00012 Bruce Austin vs Infinity Management and Investments, LLC, et al.

Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint

The motion for leave to file a first amended complaint is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

The declaration in support fails to address all the proposed additional causes of action. Further, while leave to amend is generally granted liberally, the proposed first amended complaint contains, on its face, unmeritorious causes of action.

Accordingly, the motion for leave to file a first amended complaint is denied without prejudice.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share