DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
24CV002305·sacramento·Civil·Civil Complaint
Hearing 7 months agoCONTINUED

WALLACE vs CALIFORNIA STATE LOTTERY

Motion to Amend Complaint

Hearing date
Jan 28, 2026
Department
28
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Feb 11, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffDavid N. Wallace
DefendantCalifornia State Lottery

Ruling

24CV002305: WALLACE vs CALIFORNIA STATE LOTTERY 01/28/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other to Amend Complaint with Supporting Documents in Department 28

Tentative Ruling

The Court has adopted the following procedure for hearings in Department 28 for self-represented incarcerated parties.

The clerk shall fax a copy of the tentative ruling to the litigation coordinator on or before the date of the scheduled hearing. The litigation coordinator shall provide the tentative ruling to Plaintiff within 48 hours of receiving it.

The hearing date shall automatically be continued two weeks for oral argument. The continuance date will always be an appearance required hearing so that Plaintiff need not request oral argument.

The Litigation Coordinator shall make Plaintiff available, by Zoom or telephonically, at 1:30 p.m. on the date of the continued hearing date, which will be February 11, 2026, to participate in oral argument.

To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom ID: 16039062174.

Tentative Ruling:

Incarcerated pro per Plaintiff David N. Wallace’s (“Plaintiff”) motion to amend compliant with supporting documents is ruled upon as follows.

Defendant California State Lottery’s (“Lottery”) request for judicial notice is GRANTED.

Plaintiff filed his initial complaint in this action on February 6, 2024.

On April 4, 2025, it appears that Plaintiff attempted to file an amended complaint which included exhibits. On April 16, 2025 the Court issued a notice of rejection of that filing, informing Plaintiff, “If you are attempting to amend a Complaint, you must indicate that on the Complaint submitted. Also per CRC 2.111, the use of Et. Al. in case caption is not allowed; Names on Summons must match Complaint, exactly. Enclosed are copies of your case to assist you.”

On July 31, 2025, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Amend Complaint with Supporting

24CV002305: WALLACE vs CALIFORNIA STATE LOTTERY 01/28/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other to Amend Complaint with Supporting Documents in Department 28

Documents.

On October 10, 2025, the Lottery filed a Demurrer to Plaintiff’s Complaint and/or Amended Complaint. The demurrer is set for June 15, 2026.

The Court notes that no amended compliant has been filed to date, and that the current operative complaint remains the initial complaint.

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 472(a), “A party may amend its pleading once without leave of the court at any time before the answer, demurrer, or motion to strike is filed, or after a demurrer or motion to strike is filed but before the demurrer or motion to strike is heard if the amended pleading is filed and served no later than the date for filing an opposition to the demurrer or motion to strike.”

As the opposition to the demurrer is not due until June 2, 2026, Plaintiff may freely file a first amended complaint without the need for leave of Court.

Deficiencies with Plaintiff’s prior attempt to file an amended complaint were identified in the Court’s rejection notice, and so must be resolved to allow for filing of an amended complaint.

The Court need not reach the substantive issues argued by the Lottery.

The minute order is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312 or further notice is required.

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