William Leo Jackson v. Los Angeles County Sheriffs Men Central Jail, et al.
Motion for Order for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
Court |
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT WILLIAM LEO JACKSON, Plaintiff, vs. LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFFS MEN CENTRAL JAIL, et al., Defendant. |))))))))))) | CASE NO.: 24STCV28296 [TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND Dept. 506 8:30 a.m. September 10, 2026 |
On August 22, 2025, Plaintiff William Leo Jackson filed a first amended complaint ("FAC") against Defendants Los Angeles County Sheriffs Men Central Jail, Robert Luna in his Capacity of Sheriff of Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and Facilities Only, and Sheriff Deputy Adam Kennedy.
On September 22, 2025, Defendants Los Angeles County Sheriffs Men Central Jail and Robert Luna in his Capacity of Sheriff of Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and Facilities Only filed a demurrer to the FAC. The Court sustained the demurrer on April 16, 2026 and dismissed those Defendants.
On August 13, 2026, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Order for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint.
The Court may, in its discretion and after notice to the adverse party, allow an amendment to any pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 473, subd. (a)(1).)
A motion to amend a pleading must include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended pleading which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous pleadings or amendments and must state what allegations in the previous pleading are proposed to be deleted or added, if any, and where, by page, paragraph, and line number, the allegations are located. (California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(a).)
The motion shall also be accompanied by a declaration attesting to the effect of the amendment, why the amendment is necessary and proper, when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered, and why the request for amendment was not made earlier. (California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(b).)
Plaintiff's motion does not comply with these requirements. Instead, it appears to solely be a proposed second amended complaint. It includes allegations and defendants that were already dismissed, with prejudice, via demurrer.
The motion to amend is DENIED.
Clerk to give notice. Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMCDEPT506@lacourt.ca.gov indicating intention to submit. If all parties in the case submit on the tentative ruling, no appearances before the Court are required unless a companion hearing (for example, a Case Management Conference) is also on calendar.
Dated this 10th day of September 2026 | | | Hon. Thomas D. Long Judge of the Superior Court | Case Number: 25STCV01545 Hearing Date: September 10, 2026 Dept: 506 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT AMHARA ASSOCIATION OF LOS ANGELES,
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?”