Case Number: BC510923    Hearing Date: September 08, 2014    Dept: 93

Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 93

LACEY ROBBINS,

Plaintiff(s),
v.

OP PROPERTY MANGEMENT, LP, et al.,

Defendant(s). Case No.: BC510923

Hearing Date: September 8, 2014

[TENTATIVE] RULING RE:
DEFENDANTS OP PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LP AND LA PARK LA BREA B, LLC’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE CROSS-COMPLAINT

Defendants OP Property Management LP and LA Park La Brea B, LLC’s unopposed Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint is GRANTED.

Discussion

CCP Section 428.10 states in relevant part:

A party against whom a cause of action has been asserted in a complaint or cross-complaint may file a cross-complaint setting forth either or both of the following:

(a) Any cause of action he has against any of the parties who filed the complaint or cross-complaint against him. Nothing in this subdivision authorizes the filing of a cross-complaint against the plaintiff in an action commenced under Title 7 (commencing with Section 1230.010) of Part 3.

(b) Any cause of action he has against a person alleged to be liable thereon, whether or not such person is already a party to the action, if the cause of action asserted in his cross-complaint (1) arises out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences as the cause brought against him or (2) asserts a claim, right, or interest in the property or controversy which is the subject of the cause brought against him.

“A party shall file a cross-complaint against any of the parties who filed the complaint or cross-complaint against him or her before or at the same time as the answer to the complaint or cross-complaint.” (CCP, § 428.50(a).) “Any other cross-complaint may be filed at any time before the court has set a date for trial. After the trial date has been set, a party seeking to file a cross-complaint must obtain leave of court. (CCP, § 428.50(b).) If the proposed cross-complaint is compulsory, leave must be granted so long as the party is acting in good faith. (CCP §, 426.50.) A cross-complaint is compulsory if the defendant’s cause of action arises out of the same transaction or series of transactions or occurrences as the cause of action in the complaint. (CCP §§, 426.10, 426.50.)
Discussion

Here, the cross-complaint against Valley Crest arises directly out of the accident that gives rise to the Complaint. The agreement between moving Defendants and Valley Crest provides that the latter is required to maintain the sprinklers and irrigation. (Motion, Delis Decl. (“Delis Decl.”) ¶3.) Information recently obtained from witness depositions indicate that Plaintiff slipped on water from sprinkler overspray. (Delis Decl. ¶2.) It is on the basis of this new information and the maintenance agreement that moving

Defendants seek leave to file the proposed cross-complaint, which is attached to the motion as Exhibit A. Based on the lack of any opposition, the compulsory nature of the cross-complaint, the lack of any apparent bad faith and the liberal policy regarding leave to amend, moving Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint is granted.
Moving Defendants are ordered to give notice.

DATED: September 8, 2014
_________________________
Hon. Gail Ruderman Feuer
Los Angeles Superior Court