Does a judge have discretion in denying a motion to amend or amend the cause of action?

Insufficient facts were alleged to prove that Yates knowingly received stolen property under Penal Code section 496 (the only statutory violation alleged that has a civil remedy). Nonetheless, the trial court abused its discretion in denying leave to amend. Plaintiffs' general allegations indicate that even though the cause of action failed to allege the proper facts, there is a reasonable possibility that Plaintiffs could allege the wrongful receipt and withholding of Plaintiffs' check. We therefore reverse as to the court's denial of leave to amend. (Smith v. County of Kern (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1826, 1830 ["it is an abuse of discretion to sustain a general demurrer to a complaint without leave to amend if there is a reasonable possibility the defect in the complaint can be cured by amendment"].)