| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
Notice Of Motion For Leave To Amend Complaint
Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Wednesday January 14, 2026, Line 4.
Plaintiffs Pei-Ci Lei and Xin-Ming Cai's motion for leave to file a first amended complaint is GRANTED. The court has broad discretionary power under California Code of Civil Procedure section 473(a) to grant leave for a party to amend a pleading "in furtherance of justice." "That trial courts are to liberally permit such amendments, at any stage of the proceeding, has been established policy in this state since 1901." (Hirsa v. Superior Court (1981) 118 Cal.App.3d 486, 488-89.) Although amendments are liberally granted, leave to amend is properly denied when the proposed amendment fails to state a valid cause of action and thus would be futile, or where the plaintiff has delayed in seeking the amendment and the delay has prejudiced the defendant. (Atkinson v.
Elk Corp. (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 739.) A proposed amended complaint's validity is not considered when deciding leave to amend. (See Kittredge Sports Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 1045, 1048.)
Here, Plaintiffs have established good cause supporting an order granting leave to amend. The court finds that Plaintiffs have not unreasonably delayed in seeking leave. Plaintiffs seek to amend based on a surveillance video produced during discovery that was not available to Plaintiffs until August 2025. Plaintiffs have proceeded with reasonable diligence all things, including the trial date, considered. The court finds that there is sufficient time to test the amended pleading, conduct additional discovery, test the factual record and adjust defense strategy as necessary. The court declines at this time to review the amendments to test for viability. Plaintiffs shall file their First Amended Complaint forthwith but no later than 10 days after entry of this order.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/JMQ) | |