SUNNY BATH,

Plaintiff,

vs.

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH, et al.

Defendants.

Case No.:

BC 614536 (consolidated with BC 648696)

Hearing Date:

March 8, 2018

Hearing Time:

8:30 a.m.

ORDER RE:

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT

Background

Plaintiff Sunny Bath (“Plaintiff”) filed her first employment action (BC 614536) alleging five causes of action under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) on March 23, 2016 against Defendant County of Los Angeles Department of Mental Health (“Defendant” or “County”). Plaintiff filed the operative Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) in this action on January 8, 2018, alleging five causes of action for (1) workplace color discrimination; (2) national origin discrimination; (3) hostile work environment; (4) retaliation for engaging in a protected activity; and (5) failure to prevent harassment, discrimination and/or retaliation.

Plaintiff filed a second employment action (BC 648696) on January 30, 2017, alleging ten causes of action under the FEHA. The Court deemed the two matters related on March 23, 2017 and consolidated the two matters on June 30, 2017, with case number BC 614536 set as the lead case. Plaintiff filed FEHA complaints with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”) prior to filing both actions in this case. On May 10, 2017, Plaintiff filed a third FEHA Complaint with the DFEH. Subsequently, Plaintiff filed the TAC to include the allegations from the third FEHA Complaint. On January 9, 2018, Plaintiff filed a fourth FEHA Complaint with the DFEH, and on the same day was issued a Right to Sue Notice.

Plaintiff now moves for leave to file a Fourth Amended Complaint (“4AC”) to add the allegations from her fourth FEHA Complaint to the operative pleading in this case. No opposition to this motion was filed.

Discussion

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473(a)(1), “[t]he court may, in furtherance of justice, and on any terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading.” Amendment may be allowed at any time before or after commencement of trial. ((Code Civ. Proc., § 576.) “[T]he court’s discretion will usually be exercised liberally to permit amendment of the pleadings. The policy favoring amendment is so strong that it is a rare case in which denial of leave to amend can be justified.” ((Howard v. County of San Diego (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1422, 1428 [internal citations omitted].) “If the motion to amend is timely made and the granting of the motion will not prejudice the opposing party, it is error to refuse permission to amend….” ((Morgan v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (1959) 172 Cal.App.2d 527, 530 (Morgan).) Prejudice includes “delay in trial, loss of critical evidence, or added costs of preparation.” ((Solit v. Tokai Bank (1999) 68 Cal.App.4th 1435, 1448.) “The power to permit amendments is interpreted very liberally as long as the plaintiff does not attempt to state facts which give rise to a wholly distinct and different legal obligation against the defendant.” ((Herrera v. Superior Court (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 255, 259 [internal quotations omitted].)

In light of the fact that Defendant opposed Plaintiff’s previous motion for leave to file the TAC on the grounds that Plaintiff should have included her allegations from her then-contemplated fourth FEHA Complaint and in light of the fact of Defendant’s nonopposition here, the Court finds that leave to amend is properly granted. The Court finds that Defendant will not suffer any prejudice that outweighs the strong policy favoring amendment.

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file the 4AC. Plaintiff is to file the 4AC within 3 days of the date of this Order. The 4AC is deemed served as of the date of this Order.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this Order.

DATED: March 8, 2018

________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court