How have the courts dealt with the issue of a motion for reconsideration in dismissing an action for malicious prosecution?

Most compellingly, under the circumstances of this case, the trial court's decision to dismiss the action without prejudice rather than permitting Mogley to amend the complaint substantially prejudiced Mogley: it had the practical effect of conclusively ending the litigation without ever giving her an opportunity to restate her claim properly. Although the trial court designated the dismissal as without prejudice, because the statute of limitations had run on her malicious prosecution claim by the time of the dismissal, it was for all intents and purposes a dismissal with prejudice. (Nolan v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1977) 70 Cal.App.3d 122, 129 [where a dismissal without prejudice was entered after the statute of limitations had run out, "in reality the dismissal was with prejudice"].) The trial court's minute order dismissing the complaint and its order denying the motion for reconsideration offer no insight into why the court found it appropriate to dismiss the action rather than permitting amendment of the complaint, and the record is devoid of any evident justification for conclusively terminating Mogley's action without a chance to cure the simple pleading defect it had identified.⁵

Page 7