Camargo vs. Advanced Auto Refinishing Inc.

8

4 Camargo vs. Advanced Auto Refinishing Inc.

2026-01538636 Demurrer to Complaint

First Amended Complaint filed 5/6/2026 Off Calendar 5 Chung vs. Le

2025-01483307 Motion for Leave to Amend Code of Civil Procedure section 473(a)(1) states, “The court may, in furtherance of justice, and on any terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading or proceeding by adding or striking out the name of any party, or by correcting a mistake in the name of a party, or a mistake in any other respect; and may, upon like terms, enlarge the time for answer or demurrer. The court may likewise, in its discretion, after notice to the adverse party, allow, upon any terms as may be just, an amendment to any pleading or proceeding in other particulars; and may upon like terms allow an answer to be made after the time limited by this code.” “There is a policy of great liberality in permitting amendments to the pleadings at any stage of the proceeding.” (Sullivan v.

City of Sacramento (1987) 190 Cal.App.3d 1070, 1081.) Here, Defendants seek leave to amend their answer to allege new defenses related to their assertion that the parties reached an enforceable settlement, but Plaintiff sought to impose new material terms and refused to proceed with the settlement. The motion is unopposed. There is a strong policy favoring amendment. Tentative Ruling: The Motion for Leave to Amend Answer by Defendants Trinh Le and Dao Le is GRANTED. Defendants shall file and serve their amended answer within ten days.