16-CIV-01967 CHRISTOPHER GRASBERGER, ET AL. VS. STEWART COOPER, ET AL.

CHRISTOPHER GRASBERGER GRANT H. BAKER STEWART COOPER JAMES A. LASSART

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants Christopher and Ana Grasberger et. al.’s Motion for Leave to File a Second-Amended Complaint (SAC) is GRANTED. The distinction Defendants raise in the briefing between “amended” and “supplemental” pleadings does not change the result. The Court generally has a liberal policy with respect to amended/supplemental pleadings, which serves to promote judicial economy and efficiency. The fact that the alleged trespass occurred after Plaintiffs filed the First-Amended Complaint is not dispositive. See Honig v. Financial Corp. of America, 6 Cal.App.4th 960, 965-66 (1992). The claims in the proposed SAC are sufficiently related that they should be resolved together, even if, as Defendants contend, the trespass occurred on Plaintiffs’ property, whereas the easement dispute centers on Defendants’ property. They involve the same parties and the same adjoining land.

The Court finds no unreasonable delay that would justify denying the motion. Although Plaintiffs state they observed a trespass in early 2017, they allege the trespass did not substantially begin, or become a problem, until 2018.

Nor have Defendants articulated any meaningful prejudice. Although the 6-25-18 trial date is only three months away, the trespass claim appears uncomplicated. Defendants do not identify any additional discovery that adding this claim would necessitate, and the parties still have two months until the discovery close.
The proposed SAC attached to the moving papers is not deemed filed by virtue of this motion being granted. Plaintiffs shall file their proposed SAC within five (5) days of this Order