The trial court abused its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint in response to the trial court’s ruling, before trial, on a motion in limine that plaintiff could not introduce evidence of attorney fees as damages under the tort of another theory because those damages were not alleged in the complaint. Plaintiff sought leave to amend to allege tort of another fees as damages. Plaintiff showed that defendant would not be prejudiced by the amendment since the attorney fees had been disclosed as part of plaintiff’s damages during discovery. Duchrow v. Forrest (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1359 is distinguishable as there the motion to amend was made the fourth day of a five day trial and there had not been prior discovery on the issue. The decision also cautions trial judges not to grant what amounts to judgments on the pleadings by way of in limine motions as doing so carries a high risk of reversal on appeal.