American Advertising & Sales Co. v. Mid-Western Transport

California Court of Appeal Mar 7, 1984 No. Civ. 69718Published

Before: Johnson

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a trial court does not abuse its discretion by denying a motion to file an amended complaint that contradicts previous verified pleadings when the moving party fails to provide satisfactory evidence that the original allegations were the result of mistake or inadvertence.

Issues

Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying leave to file a second amended complaint that contradicted prior verified pleadings.
Whether a proposed amendment that contradicts earlier pleadings requires evidence that the original pleading was the result of mistake or inadvertence.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“But a court is not required to accept an amended complaint that is not filed in good faith, is frivolous or sham.”

“The well-established rule is that a proposed amendment which contradicts allegations in an earlier pleading will not be allowed in the absence of “very satisfactory evidence” upon which it is “clearly shown that the earlier pleading is the result of mistake or inadvertence.””

“An appellate court will not interfere with the denial of a motion to amend unless an abuse of discretion is manifest.”

Opinion

JOHNSON, J.

Plaintiff “American” appeals from an order dismissing its first amended complaint following a summary judgment in favor of defendant “Mid-Western” and from an order denying plaintiff’s motion to file a second amended complaint.

Robert Walters is the principal stockholder in several corporations engaged in the trucking business. Among them are American Advertising and Sales Company, (American) and National Carrier Service (National). Walters owns the majority of the stock in American and American owns all of the stock in National. Walters is president of both companies and operates both companies out of a common office. Separate records are kept for both companies. National is licensed as a motor transportation broker by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC); American is not.

In a complaint verified by Walters, American sued defendant Mid-Western Transport (Mid-Western). Mid-Western demurred on the ground, inter alia, that the complaint did not allege that American was an ICC licensed motor transportation broker. In response to this demurrer, American filed a first amended complaint, also verified by Walters, alleging that American “is, and at all times herein mentioned was, a motor transportation broker licensed by the Interstate Commerce Commission.”

Armed with an affidavit from the ICC that American was not licensed by it, Mid-Western moved for summary judgment. American responded with a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint, verified again by Walters, alleging that the contract was actually between Mid-Western and

[878]

American’s wholly owned subsidiary, National, which was licensed by the ICC.

The trial court granted Mid-Western’s motion for summary judgment and denied American’s motion to file an amended complaint.

American does not dispute the correctness of summary judgment for Mid-Western on the first amended complaint.

The motion for leave to file a second amended complaint was based on the declaration of Robert Walters stating that he was the president of American and another corporation, “National,” and that actually it was National, an ICC licensed motor transportation broker, that had the contract with Mid-Western and performed the services in issue.

American Advertising & Sales Co. v. Mid-Western Transport

AI Brief

JOHNSON, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief