Sweet vs. Albertsons Companies, Inc.
Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Summary Adjudication of Issues
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
30-2023- Cross-Defendants Hoang Huy Tu and The Tu Firm, APLC’s 01347925-CU- (collectively, “Tu Defendants”) motion to strike the First PN-CJC Amended Cross-Complaint (“FACC”) of Adore Escrow, Inc. (“Adore”) is GRANTED.
“Following an order sustaining a demurrer or a motion for judgment on the pleadings with leave to amend, the plaintiff may amend his or her complaint only as authorized by the court’s order.” (Harris v. Wachovia Mortg., FSB (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 1018, 1023.) “The plaintiff may not amend the complaint to add a new cause of action without having obtained permission to do so, unless the new cause of action is within the scope of the order granting leave to amend.” (Ibid.)
The Court’s ruling on the prior demurrer did not give Adore leave to add new causes of action.
The FACC filed 2/2/2026 (ROA 553) is STRICKEN.
The 6/26/2026 hearing on cross-defendant, Provident Title Company’s demurrer to FACC is VACATED, because there is no longer an operative pleading to demur to.
The court will give Adore one final opportunity to amend the cross-complaint in strict compliance with the court’s 1/23/2026 order. Adore is given 5 days leave to amend. If Adore chooses to amend, Adore is ORDERED to file a red-lined and clean copy of the amended pleading.
Clerk to give notice.
8 Sweet vs. Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Summary Albertsons Adjudication of Issues Companies, Inc. Off calendar. The parties failed to comply with the court’s 30-2025- 4/17/2026 order. 01493893-CU- PO-CJC
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?”