Robert Castro, et al.

Plaintiffs,

v.

Adan Tinojera, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC676423

Hearing Date: March 8, 2018

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

defendant’s motion to amend answer

BACKGROUND

This action involves a truck versus pedestrian accident involving Plaintiffs Robert Castro and Elsa Castro (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants Adan Tinajera, erroneously sued as Adan Tinajero, and his employer, to be discussed below, (collectively, “Defendants”) that occurred on October 24, 2015. The complaint, filed Sept 18, 2017, alleges a cause of action for motor vehicle. On December 22, 2017, Defendants filed an answer to the complaint.

Defendants now move to file an amended answer whereby they seek to change the name of Defendant Tinajera’s employer.

LEGAL STANDARD

The court may grant leave to amend the pleadings at any stage of the action. (See CCP §473(a).) A party may discover the need to amend after all pleadings are completed (the case is “at issue”), and new information requires a change in the nature of the claims or defenses previously pleaded. (Dye v. Caterpillar, Inc. (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 1366, 1379.) Rarely is a court justified in refusing a party leave to amend his pleadings so that he may properly present his case or present a meritorious defense. (Redevelopment Agency v. Herrold (1978) 86 Cal.App.3d 1024, 1031.)

DISCUSSION

The complaint names Defendant Tinajera as well as several Doe defendants. Defendant Tinajera was driving the truck involved in the collision as part of his employment. Defense counsel represents both Defendant Tinajera as well as the employer. Defense counsel undertook to determine the correct corporate identity for the employer. Originally, counsel believed the employer to be “Performance Team, LLC dba Gale/Triangle, Inc.” based on information from the clients and a search of the Secretary of State registry. (Vasquez Decl., at ¶¶ 2-3.) However, counsel has since discovered that the employer’s correct name is “Performance Team Logistics, LLC dba Gale/Triangle, Inc.” (See id. at ¶ 4.) Counsel states that it is necessary to change the name because there is a separate entity not connected with this incident named “Performance Team, LLC” that is not a proper defendant to this action. (Id. at ¶¶ 4-5.)

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

The unopposed motion of Defendants is granted. (CCP §437(a).) Defendants are ordered to file their First Amended Answer within 10 days.

Defendants are ordered to provide notice of this order.

DATED: March 8, 2018 ___________________________

Elaine Lu

Judge of the Superior Court