Wiener

Wiener v. Superior Court

Good Law
130 Cal. Rptr. 61·1976 Cal. App. LEXIS 1537·58 Cal. App. 3d 525
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 19, 1976Civ. 47519California1,526 words

Opinion

Opinion

Files, J.

The question to be decided is whether a notice of motion for leave to amend a complaint, accompanied by a proposed pleading of a second and distinct cause of action not previously pleaded, stops the running of the statute of limitations as to the cause pleaded for the first time in the amendment. We have concluded that under the facts of this case the action on the second cause was “commenced” when the notice of motion was filed, thereby stopping the running of the statute.

On February 6, 1975, petitioners (hereinafter plaintiffs) filed in the superior court a complaint charging that, on or about April 23, 1974, defendants had caused a libelous statement to be published in the Los Angeles Times. Defendants filed an answer March 14, 1975, denying the allegations of the complaint generally.

On April 24, 1975, the plaintiffs filed in the superior court a notice of motion for leave to amend the complaint. The notice was accompanied by a copy of a “proposed first amended complaint for libel, slander and invasion of privacy.” This document restated the allegations of the original complaint regarding the April 23 statement, and added that on April 25, 1974, defendants had made…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.