This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/23/2020 at 14:27:43 (UTC).

LORENA VANEGAS VS WILLIAM BAUMGART, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 03/08/2019 LORENA VANEGAS filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against WILLIAM BAUMGART. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is WENDY CHANG. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******2438

  • Filing Date:

    03/08/2019

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

WENDY CHANG

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

VANEGAS LORENA

Defendants

RJS DEMOLITION AND DISPOSAL

BAUMGART WILLIAM

RJS CONSTRUCTION SUPPLIES

STOCK JEREMY DANIELS

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

PEREZ RAYMOND

5161 Pomona Blvd Suite 208

Los Angeles, CA 90022

Defendant Attorneys

MASLAUSKI STEVEN

SIMMS RYAN

 

Court Documents

Summons - Summons on Complaint

11/4/2020: Summons - Summons on Complaint

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

10/7/2020: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

9/30/2020: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment; Hearing on Motion for...)

10/5/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment; Hearing on Motion for...)

Demand for Jury Trial - Demand for Jury Trial

1/9/2020: Demand for Jury Trial - Demand for Jury Trial

Answer - Answer

1/9/2020: Answer - Answer

Exhibit List - Exhibit List

5/4/2020: Exhibit List - Exhibit List

Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order)

5/15/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order)

Motion for Leave to Amend (name extension) - Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint for General Negligence

6/8/2020: Motion for Leave to Amend (name extension) - Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint for General Negligence

Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order)

6/10/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order)

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

6/17/2020: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order)

6/17/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order)

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

6/17/2020: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Court's Continuance of Hearing Defendant William Baumgart's Motion for Summary Judgment

6/22/2020: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Court's Continuance of Hearing Defendant William Baumgart's Motion for Summary Judgment

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

3/8/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

3/8/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

3/8/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

Summons - Summons on Complaint

3/8/2019: Summons - Summons on Complaint

28 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/11/2022
  • Hearing03/11/2022 at 10:30 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/15/2020
  • Hearing12/15/2020 at 09:30 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Trial Setting Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Request for Entry of Default / Judgment: As To Parties: removed

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/09/2020
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by: Lorena Vanegas (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/09/2020
  • DocketNotice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/06/2020
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: RJS Demolition and Disposal (Defendant); As to: Lorena Vanegas (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/06/2020
  • DocketPursuant to the request of moving party, Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment scheduled for 02/16/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Rescheduled by Party was rescheduled to 06/17/2021 10:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/04/2020
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Lorena Vanegas (Plaintiff); As to: William Baumgart (Defendant); RJS Construction Supplies (Defendant); RJS Demolition and Disposal (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2020
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Lorena Vanegas (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/05/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint for General Negligence: Filed By: Lorena Vanegas (Plaintiff); Result: Granted; Result Date: 10/05/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
44 More Docket Entries
  • 03/11/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Wendy Chang in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/11/2019
  • DocketOrder on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Signed and Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/11/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 09/04/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/11/2019
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 03/11/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2019
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Lorena Vanegas (Plaintiff); As to: William Baumgart (Defendant); RJS Construction Supplies (Defendant); RJS Demolition and Disposal (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Lorena Vanegas (Plaintiff); As to: William Baumgart (Defendant); RJS Construction Supplies (Defendant); RJS Demolition and Disposal (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Lorena Vanegas (Plaintiff); As to: William Baumgart (Defendant); RJS Construction Supplies (Defendant); RJS Demolition and Disposal (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2019
  • DocketRequest to Waive Court Fees; Filed by: Lorena Vanegas (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STLC02438    Hearing Date: October 05, 2020    Dept: 26

Vanegas v. Baumgart, et al

MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT; MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

(CCP §§ 473(a); 437c)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Lorena Vanegas’ Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint is GRANTED. PLAINTIFF TO FILE AND SERVE THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

DEFENDANT WILLIAM BAUMGART’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS MOOT.

Plaintiff Lorena Vanegas (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for motor vehicle negligence against Defendants William Baumgart (“Defendant Baumgart”) RJS Construction Supplies and RJS Demolition and Disposal (“Defendants”) on March 8, 2019. Defendant Baumgart filed the instant Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the alternative Summary Adjudication on May 4, 2020. Plaintiff filed an opposition on June 8, 2020 and Defendant Baumgart replied on September 28, 2020.

Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint on June 10, 2020. To date, no opposition has been filed.

Discussion

Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges her vehicle was damaged in a motor vehicle accident on October 6, 2018 due to Defendants’ negligent operation, ownership or entrustment of a motor vehicle. (Compl., ¶MV-2.) Plaintiff now seeks leave of Court to amend the Complaint to allege a cause of action for general negligence. Specifically, Plaintiff’s counsel submits a declaration stating that the factual allegations in the Complaint are not correct and must be amended to allege general negligence based on Defendants’ placement of large metal trash bin placed on a poorly-lit street. (Motion, Perez Decl., p. 3:7-12.) Plaintiff contends that she side-swiped the bin while driving sustaining property damage and personal injuries. (Ibid.)

Leave to amend is permitted under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (a) and section 576. The policy favoring amendment and resolving all matters in the same dispute is “so strong that it is a rare case in which denial of leave to amend can be justified. . . .” “Although courts are bound to apply a policy of great liberality in permitting amendments to the complaint at any stage of the proceedings, up to and including trial [citations], this policy should be applied only ‘where no prejudice is shown to the adverse party . . . . [citation].  A different result is indicated ‘where inexcusable delay and probable prejudice to the opposing party’ is shown. [Citation].” (Magpali v. Farmers Group (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 471, 487 (emphasis added).)

Even if the Court were to find that Plaintiff’s counsel’s failure to allege the correct facts and cause of action to be inexcusable, there is no apparent prejudice to Defendants from allowing amendment of the Complaint at this time. The Motion for Leave to Amend is unopposed and no trial date is pending. Nor does Defendant Baumgart’s pending Motion for Summary Judgment require denial of leave to amend. (Falcon v. Long Beach Genetics, Inc. (2014) 224 Cal.App.4th 1263, 1280 (holding that if the facts indicate that a plaintiff has a good cause of action which is imperfectly pleaded, the trial court should give the plaintiff an opportunity to amend instead of granting the motion for summary judgment.)

A motion for leave to amend a pleading must also comply with the procedural requirements of California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324, which requires a supporting declaration to set forth explicitly what allegations are to be added and where, and explicitly stating what new evidence was discovered warranting the amendment and why the amendment was not made earlier. The motion must also include (1) a copy of the proposed and numbered amendment, (2) specifications by reference to pages and lines the allegations that would be deleted and added, and (3) a declaration specifying the effect, necessity and propriety of the amendments, date of discovery and reasons for delay. (See Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324, subds. (a), (b).) As discussed above, the Motion is accompanied by a declaration that explains the discovery of actual facts of this case and attaches a copy of the proposed First Amended Complaint.

Therefore, Plaintiff Lorena Vanegas’ Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint is GRANTED. PLAINTIFF TO FILE AND SERVE THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

In light of the ruling on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint, DEFENDANT WILLIAM BAUMGART’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS MOOT.

Plaintiff to give notice. 

ANALYSIS:

Plaintiff Lorena Vanegas (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for motor vehicle negligence against Defendants William Baumgart (“Defendant Baumgart”) RJS Construction Supplies and RJS Demolition and Disposal (“Defendants”) on March 8, 2019. Defendant Baumgart filed the instant Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the alternative Summary Adjudication on May 4, 2020. Plaintiff filed an opposition on June 8, 2020 and Defendant Baumgart replied on September 28, 2020.

Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint on June 10, 2020. To date, no opposition has been filed.

Discussion

Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges her vehicle was damaged in a motor vehicle accident on October 6, 2018 due to Defendants’ negligent operation, ownership or entrustment of a motor vehicle. (Compl., ¶MV-2.) Plaintiff now seeks leave of Court to amend the Complaint to allege a cause of action for general negligence. Specifically, Plaintiff’s counsel submits a declaration stating that the factual allegations in the Complaint are not correct and must be amended to allege general negligence based on Defendants’ placement of large metal trash bin placed on a poorly-lit street. (Motion, Perez Decl., p. 3:7-12.) Plaintiff contends that she side-swiped the bin while driving sustaining property damage and personal injuries. (Ibid.)

Leave to amend is permitted under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (a) and section 576. The policy favoring amendment and resolving all matters in the same dispute is “so strong that it is a rare case in which denial of leave to amend can be justified. . . .” “Although courts are bound to apply a policy of great liberality in permitting amendments to the complaint at any stage of the proceedings, up to and including trial [citations], this policy should be applied only ‘where no prejudice is shown to the adverse party . . . . [citation]. A different result is indicated ‘where inexcusable delay and probable prejudice to the opposing party’ is shown. [Citation].” (Magpali v. Farmers Group (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 471, 487 (emphasis added).)

Even if the Court were to find that Plaintiff’s counsel’s failure to allege the correct facts and cause of action to be inexcusable, there is no apparent prejudice to Defendants from allowing amendment of the Complaint at this time. The Motion for Leave to Amend is unopposed and no trial date is pending. Nor does Defendant Baumgart’s pending Motion for Summary Judgment require denial of leave to amend. (Falcon v. Long Beach Genetics, Inc. (2014) 224 Cal.App.4th 1263, 1280 (holding that if the facts indicate that a plaintiff has a good cause of action which is imperfectly pleaded, the trial court should give the plaintiff an opportunity to amend instead of granting the motion for summary judgment.)

A motion for leave to amend a pleading must also comply with the procedural requirements of California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324, which requires a supporting declaration to set forth explicitly what allegations are to be added and where, and explicitly stating what new evidence was discovered warranting the amendment and why the amendment was not made earlier. The motion must also include (1) a copy of the proposed and numbered amendment, (2) specifications by reference to pages and lines the allegations that would be deleted and added, and (3) a declaration specifying the effect, necessity and propriety of the amendments, date of discovery and reasons for delay. (See Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324, subds. (a), (b).) As discussed above, the Motion is accompanied by a declaration that explains the discovery of actual facts of this case and attaches a copy of the proposed First Amended Complaint.

Therefore, Plaintiff Lorena Vanegas’ Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint is GRANTED. PLAINTIFF TO FILE AND SERVE THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

In light of the ruling on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint, DEFENDANT WILLIAM BAUMGART’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS MOOT.

Plaintiff to give notice.