In The Matter of Ricardo Efren Ponce Rico
PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
For the foregoing reasons, the demurrers are, each, SUSTAINED.
3. Leave to Amend
Generally, it is an abuse of discretion for a court to deny leave to amend where there is any reasonable possibility that a Plaintiff can state a good cause of action. (Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349.) However, the pleading party bears the burden of showing such reasonable possibility. (Ibid.) Here, the burden is on Plaintiff to show in what manner it can amend the complaint, and how that amendment will change the legal effect of the pleading. (Ibid.; Medina v. Safe Guard Products (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 105, 112 n.8; see also Heritage Pac. Fin’l, LLC v. Monroy (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 972, 994 [court did not abuse discretion in denying leave to amend where, despite ample opportunity, plaintiff failed to demonstrate it could cure defect].)
As County Defendants and Bonny’s note, Petitioner has now had four attempts at stating a good claim in this action. While Petitioner requests leave to amend through its Opposition briefs, it makes no effort to suggest in what manner it can amend to state a good claim. Based on the nature of the allegations in the TAP, the arguments advanced through the Opposition, and the history of the pleading in this action, it is entirely unclear, to the Court, how Petitioner could amend the TAP to state any valid claim.
Based on the foregoing, the demurrers are, each, SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.
In the Matter of Sara Perez 26CV001110
PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME
TENTATIVE RULING: Notice has been properly published and no written objections have been filed. The petition is GRANTED without need for appearance.
In The Matter of Ricardo Efren Ponce Rico 26CV001306
PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME
TENTATIVE RULING: An Order to Show Cause for Change of Name (OSC) was entered in this matter on June 23, 2026. Petitioner is required to publish the OSC in the manner set forth in Code of Civil Procedure, section 1277. However, there is no proof of publication (POP) in the Court’s file. If one is filed before the hearing, the petition will be GRANTED without need for appearance.
If no proof of publication is filed, the matter will be CONTINUED to September 10, 2026, at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. A to provide any publisher time to file the POP.
17
Cited authorities
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?”