LeMere v. L.A. Unified Sch. Dist., No. B281843 (D2d8 May 14, 2019)
A demurrer was granted with leave to amend. When plaintiff amended, she also added a brand new cause of action. But she didn’t have leave to do that. So the trial court dismissed. Moreover, it had been more than a year since the original complaint had been filed. Plaintiff didn’t have any good reason why the new claim couldn’t have been alleged all along. And the claim was nonetheless legally defective. So the trial court was not required to afford her leave.
Affirmed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
We've Moved ....
After a two-year hiatus, 111 North Hill Street has decided to decamp for Substack. Thank you for your readership over the last twelve year...
-
Soto v. Borgwarner Morse Tec Inc. , No. B252995 (D2d4, as modified August 20, 2015) Although some law-and-economics attuned federal judges...
-
The Rossdale Grp. v. Walton , No. H043476 (D6 Apr. 15, 2017) This is a weird and kind of narrow opinion about standing that is mostly shap...
No comments:
Post a Comment