In New Albertsons, Inc. v. Superior Court (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 1403 the Court examined the philosophy of relief behind section 2033.300's provisions for withdrawal or amendment of admissions under certain conditions. The Court said that the statute "eliminates undeserved windfalls obtained through requests for admission and furthers the policy favoring the resolution of lawsuits on the merits." (Id. at p. 1418.) The Court observed that the provision in section 2033.300 regarding relief based on mistake, inadvertence and excusable neglect is identical in most respects to the language and spirit of section 473, subdivision (b), and the two statutes serve similar purposes. The Court noted that in Elston v. City of Turlock (1985) 38 Cal.3d 227 the court held that while motions for relief under section 473 are to be decided by a trial court using its discretion, that discretion is not unlimited and it must be exercised in conformity with the spirit of relief intended by the statute so that substantial justice is served, not defeated, and thus because the law favors that cases be tried and decided on their merits, if there are any doubts whether relief should be granted they must be resolved in favor of the person seeking relief. (New Albertsons, Inc., supra, 168 Cal.App.4th at p. 1419.)