Motion for Failure to State a Claim in California

What Is a Motion for Failure to State a Claim?

A “motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted” is a procedural label used in federal court, not California court. The state-court equivalents are a demurrer, or a motion for judgment on the pleadings. Code of Civ. Proc., §§430.10, 438.

The function of a demurrer is to test the legal sufficiency of a pleading. Trs. Of Capital Wholesale Elec. Etc. Fund v. Shearson Lehman Bros. (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 617, 621. Consequently, “[a] demurrer reaches only to the contents of the pleading and such matters as may be considered under the doctrine of judicial notice.” South Shore Land Co. v. Petersen (1964) 226 Cal.App.2d 725, 732. “It is not the ordinary function of a demurrer to test the truth of the plaintiff’s allegations or the accuracy with which he describes the defendant’s conduct.... [T]he facts alleged in the pleading are deemed to be true, however improbable they may be.” Align Technology, Inc. v. Tran (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 949, 958.

“Judgment on the pleadings is akin to a demurrer and is properly granted only if the complaint does not state facts sufficient to state a cause of action against that defendant. The grounds for the motion must appear on the face of the complaint, and in any matters subject to judicial notice. The court accepts as true all material factual allegations, giving them a liberal construction, but it does not consider conclusions of fact or law, opinions, speculation, or allegations contrary to law or judicially noticed facts.” Shea Homes Limited Partnership v. County of Alameda (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1246, 1254.

It is an abuse of discretion for the court to deny leave to amend where there is any reasonable possibility that plaintiff can state a good cause of action. Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349. The burden is on the plaintiff to show in what manner he or she can amend the complaint, and how that amendment will change the legal effect of the pleading. Medina v. Safe-Guard Products (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 105, 112.

For more see Demurrer and Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.

Rulings for Motion for Failure to State a Claim in California

The demurrer for failure to state a claim to the fifth cause of action (fraudulent concealment) is SUSTAINED, with leave to amend. Although Plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged a duty to disclose, they have failed to allege facts to support the elements of Demurring Defendant's intent and Plaintiffs' lack of knowledge. The demurrer for failure to state a claim to the sixth cause of action (negligence) is SUSTAINED, with leave to amend.

  • Name

    CONSTANTINE NICHOLAS PAPANICOLAOU VS. SHARON PALMER

  • Case No.

    56-2017-00499246-CU-OR-VTA

  • Hearing

    Oct 17, 2019

Demurrer on the Ground of Failure to State a Claim as to Claims Against Gregg's/GAH (the Business Entity Defendant): Plaintiff failed to allege any facts to show that Gregg's/GAH engaged in any actionable conduct. Demurring Defendants' demurrer on the ground of failure to state a claim to the FAC as a whole, as asserted against GAH, is SUSTAINED, with leave to amend.

  • Case No.

    2021-00561584

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2022

Alonso's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the second cause of action for fraud – damages should is overruled. - Demurrer for Failure to State a Claim to the Third Cause of Action for Breach of Contract Plaintiff sufficiently alleges damages, and Alonso's arguments lack merit. Therefore, Alonso's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the third cause of action for breach of contract is overruled.

  • Name

    JUAN MANUEL CERVANTES VS. PILAR ALONSO

  • Case No.

    56-2020-00544483-CU-OR-VTA

  • Hearing

    Nov 05, 2020

Demurrer to First Amended Complaint The Demurrer by Defendants Samuel Alexander Escobar dba Lionsgate Construction and Argonaut Insurance Company to the Complaint’s First Cause of Action for failure to state a claim, for uncertainty, and for failure to allege whether contact is oral or written or implied by conduct; to the Complaint’s Second Cause of Action for failure to state a claim, for uncertainty, for failure to allege

  • Name

    WEST CREEK BUILDERS, LLC VS SAMUEL ESCOBAR ET AL.

  • Case No.

    20CV-03773

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2021

  • County

    Merced County, CA

The Court intends to rule as follows: Defendant's demurrer for failure to state a claim and uncertainty is OVERRULED. Defendant's demurrer to the FAC on the grounds of failure to state a claim and uncertainty is OVERRULED."

  • Name

    JUANA DE JARA VS VENTURA COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER

  • Case No.

    56-2017-00503490-CU-MM-VTA

  • Hearing

    Jun 11, 2018

SPS's demurrer for failure to state a claim as to the first, third, and fourth causes of action is OVERRULED. SPS's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the second cause of action is SUSTAINED with leave to amend to allow Plaintiffs an opportunity to plead violations of Civil Code sections 2923.7 and/or 2924.11.

  • Name

    HEIDI CORDOVA VS. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NA

  • Case No.

    56-2018-00516580-CU-OR-VTA

  • Hearing

    Oct 22, 2018

Defendant's demurrer for uncertainty to the first and second causes of action is MOOT due to the ruling on the demurrer for failure to state a claim.

  • Name

    JUANA DE JARA VS VENTURA COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER

  • Case No.

    56-2017-00503490-CU-MM-VTA

  • Hearing

    Mar 23, 2018

Demurrer To The First Amended Complaint For Failure To State A Claim Re: The Conversion Of An Idea [Redacted] Set for hearing on Thursday, November 12, 2009, line 6, DEFENDANTS BNY MELLON PERFORMANCE & RISK ANALYTICS, INC., THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON Demurrer to the First Amended Complaint for Failure to State a Claim Re: The Conversion Of An Idea. Demurrer sustained without leave to amend.

  • Name

    JOHN S. KARLS VS. THE BANK OF NEW YORK ET AL

  • Case No.

    CGC09489460

  • Hearing

    Nov 12, 2009

Respondents' demurrer for failure to state a claim to the third cause of action is SUSTAINED, without leave to amend. Involuntary dissolution under Corporations Code section 6510 of a religious corporation is expressly prohibited by Corporations Code section 9680. (See Corp. Code, § 9680(g) ["Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 6510) does not apply to religious corporations . . . ."].) Respondents' demurrer for failure to state a claim to the fourth cause of action is OVERRULED.

  • Name

    PETITION OF FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF VENTURA

  • Case No.

    56-2017-00502990-CU-PT-VTA

  • Hearing

    Nov 14, 2019

Chen's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the third cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty is OVERRULED. Fourth Cause of Action for Promissory Estoppel: The Fourth Cause of action incorporates by reference all prior allegations of the complaint. (See SAXC, ¶ 79.) The prior allegations specifically allege facts that support this claim. Chen's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the fourth cause of action for promissory estoppel should be OVERRULED.

  • Name

    GCX INNOVATION INC VS. CEN XU

  • Case No.

    56-2019-00535041-CU-BC-VTA

  • Hearing

    Dec 14, 2020

Motion And Notice Of Hearing: Motion And Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted Rule 12(B)6 Set for hearing on Tuesday, August 16, 2016, Line 7, DEFENDANT KARLEEN GRIFFIN'S Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted Rule 12(B)6. The motion is continued to be heard on August 30, 2016, by Judge Kahn with the companion motion for sanctions.

  • Name

    MARK HOOSHMAND VS. KARLEEN LATORYA GRIFFIN ET AL

  • Case No.

    CGC15549301

  • Hearing

    Aug 16, 2016

Twombly's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the sixth cause of action is SUSTAINED, with leave to amend. 7.

  • Case No.

    2021-00558481

  • Hearing

    Dec 14, 2021

Twombly's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the seventh cause of action is SUSTAINED, with leave to amend. 8. Eighth Cause of Action for IIED As noted, the complaint does not include any allegation of extreme or outrageous conduct by Twombly. Twombly's demurrer on the ground of failure to state a claim to the eighth cause of action is SUSTAINED, with leave to amend. 9.

  • Case No.

    2021-00558481

  • Hearing

    Dec 14, 2021

Demurrer to Third Amended Complaint and to the First, Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Causes of Action therein on grounds of uncertainty and failure to state a claim. The Demurrer to the First, Second and Third Causes of Action on the grounds of uncertainty and failure to state a claim are OVERRULED.

  • Name

    ROBIN RECLA, ET AL. VS SHAWN GEORGE

  • Case No.

    20CV-00684

  • Hearing

    Jul 28, 2021

  • County

    Merced County, CA

Demurrer to Third Amended Complaint and to the First, Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Causes of Action therein on grounds of uncertainty and failure to state a claim. The Demurrer to the First, Second and Third Causes of Action on the grounds of uncertainty and failure to state a claim are OVERRULED.

  • Name

    ROBIN RECLA, ET AL. VS SHAWN GEORGE

  • Case No.

    20CV-00684

  • Hearing

    Aug 04, 2021

  • County

    Merced County, CA

Defendant's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the second cause of action for battery is SUSTAINED with leave to amend. Plaintiff fails to allege sufficient facts to support the element of intent. Defendant's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the third cause of action for IIED is SUSTAINED with leave to amend. Plaintiff fails to allege sufficient facts to support the elements of extreme/outrageous conduct and intent/reckless disregard.

  • Name

    MICHELLE SOLTIES VS. DONALD R MULLIN

  • Case No.

    56-2018-00515585-CU-NP-VTA

  • Hearing

    Oct 17, 2018

  • Judge

    Vincent O'Neill

  • County

    Ventura County, CA

General Motors, LLC Demurrer to Plaintiff's Third Cause of Action for Fraudulent Concealment for Failure to State A Claim Defendant’s Demurrer to Plaintiff's Third Cause of Action for Fraudulent Concealment for Failure to State A Claim is SUSTAINED WITH 120 DAYS LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiff has failed to state a cause for fraud with the requisite specificity stating what was concealed, who at Defendant corporation was aware of the facts concealed and when.

  • Name

    VICTOR GARCIA VS GENERAL MOTORS, LLC

  • Case No.

    23CV-00938

  • Hearing

    Jul 18, 2023

  • County

    Merced County, CA

Defendants' demurrer for failure to state a claim to the second cause of action is OVERRULED. The procedures in Ed. Code section 49070 do not apply. Otherwise, Defendants do not challenge the sufficiency of the alleged exhaustion of the Government Claim procedures in the SAC. (See SAC, ¶¶50-58.) It is apparent that Plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged exhaustion under the Government Claims Act. Defendants' demurrer for failure to state a claim to the third cause of action against May and Cox is OVERRULED.

  • Name

    AH VS. SIMI VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT

  • Case No.

    56-2018-00512587-CU-PO-VTA

  • Hearing

    Dec 21, 2018

Defendant Mark Zavad's demurrer to the sixth cause of action for 'trespass' and 'interference with quiet enjoyment' is SUSTAINED for failure to state a claim and uncertainty. (Code Civ. Proc.., § 430.10, subds. (e) & (f).) Plaintiffs' accusation that Mark Zavad's alleged resetting of the water control system 'may' have harmed the leasehold by 'running up' their water bill is too uncertain to be actionable. (FAC, ¶¶ 51, 54.)

  • Name

    DOUG LASHER VS. JEROME SPRUIT

  • Case No.

    56-2011-00394696-CU-OR-SIM

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2011

Neuron's demurrer for the fourth and fifth c/a's in the 4AC on the ground of failure to state a claim is overruled. The court previously overruled Neuron's demurrer to the same causes of action as they appeared in the second amended complaint. Neuron's demurrer to the sixth cause of action in the 4AC on the ground of failure to state a claim is overruled. Plaintiff sufficiently alleges facts giving rise to a claim for breach of fiduciary duty pursuant to Moore v. Regents at 51 Cal.3d 120.

  • Name

    ROBERT ACQUARELLI MD PH D VS. LILIANA MEGLEI COHEN MD

  • Case No.

    56-2016-00490683-CU-MM-VTA

  • Hearing

    Feb 22, 2019

Thus, Defendants' demurrer for failure to state a claim to the fourth cause of action for fraud/false promise is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, to allow Plaintiffs an opportunity to plead who made the allegedly false statements, their authority to speak for Defendants, and when the statements were made.

  • Name

    TUMBLEWEED ADVERTISING VS. JONES

  • Case No.

    56-2018-00510184-CU-BT-VTA

  • Hearing

    Jul 24, 2018

  • Judge

    Vincent O'Neill

  • County

    Ventura County, CA

Moving defendant's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the FAC as a whole is Overruled. Although not addressed by the parties, a general demurrer for failure to state a claim directed to the complaint as a whole should be denied if some portion of the complaint states a cause of action. Jones v. Iverson, 131 Cal. 101 @104.

  • Name

    LOU KAWILE VS. ESTELLA BUNDALIAN

  • Case No.

    56-2018-00508786-CU-FR-VTA

  • Hearing

    Oct 31, 2018

The court intends to sustain with leave to amend Defendant Leslie Bittenson's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the fifth and eleventh causes of action. The demurrer by Defendant Leslie Bittenson ("L. Bittenson") for failure to state a claim to the fourth cause of action for fraud in the Third Amended Complaint ("TAC") is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.

  • Name

    TERRI BITTENSON VS. MARK BITTENSON

  • Case No.

    56-2015-00475085-CU-PO-VTA

  • Hearing

    Mar 26, 2018

The demurrer to each cause of action in the FAC on the ground of failure to state a claim by Ocwen and the demurrer to each cause of action in the FAC on the ground of failure to state a claim by Caliber and U.S. Bank as Trustee for the Master Trust is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. Defendant Bank of America filed a "reply" brief. However, Bank of America did not file a demurrer to the First Amended Complaint, and this ruling is therefore not applicable to it or the other defendants.

  • Name

    ZIPSER VS. CALIBER HOME LOANS

  • Case No.

    56-2017-00499979-CU-OR-VTA

  • Hearing

    Dec 18, 2017

Defendant's demurrer for failure to state a claim is sustained with leave to amend as to the sixth cause of action, and without leave to amend as to the seventh and eighth causes of action. Defendant's demurrer for failure to state a claim is overruled as to the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth causes of action. Defendant's demurrer for uncertainty is overruled in its entirety.

  • Name

    OSCAR CASTRO VS. SWINERTON INCORPORATED, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION ET AL

  • Case No.

    CGC19581023

  • Hearing

    May 18, 2021

  • County

    San Francisco County, CA

Defendants' demurrer on the grounds of failure to state a claim and uncertainty is OVERRULED. Plaintiff correctly states that Texas law does not govern this tort claim for conversion. The contract only states that "[t]his Contract is governed by the law of Texas and applicable federal law and regulations[.]" (Compl., Ex. 1, p. 3.)

  • Case No.

    2021-00558081

  • Hearing

    Dec 20, 2021

Notice Of Hearing On Notice Of Motion And Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted NO OPPOSITION FILED/HEARING REQUIRED RE SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT. (302/REQ/ju)

  • Name

    LOOKSMART,LTD. A CORPORATION VS. BABYAGE,INC. AKA BABYAGE.COM,INC.,A CORPORATION ET AL

  • Case No.

    CGC03417520

  • Hearing

    Oct 15, 2003

SVUSD's demurrer to the second cause of action in the FAC on the ground of failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED with leave to amend. SVUSD persuasively argues that Plaintiff fails to allege particular facts to support these causes of action as required; the allegations in the FAC are too conclusory. Notably, with respect to the mandatory duties in Ed.

  • Name

    JANE DOE VS SIMI VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST

  • Case No.

    56-2018-00520090-CU-PO-VTA

  • Hearing

    Aug 02, 2019

Armagan's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the second cause of action in the FAC is SUSTAINED, with leave to amend. Dr. Armagan's motion to strike portions of the FAC should be GRANTED IN PART, with leave to amend, and DENIED IN PART. The motion is GRANTED, with leave to amend, as to the prayer for punitive damages on the ground that Plaintiffs failed to allege sufficiently specific facts to show malice, oppression, or fraud.

  • Name

    CHRISTOPHER POLANCO VS. LOS ROBLES REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER

  • Case No.

    56-2019-00527690-CU-MM-VTA

  • Hearing

    Nov 25, 2019

  • Judge

    Vincent O'Neill

  • County

    Ventura County, CA

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

TENTATIVE RULING Defendant San Diego Unified School District's unopposed demurrer to the complaint and each cause of action in plaintiff Jane Doe I's complaint is sustained based upon uncertainty and failure to state a claim, with leave to amend. Any amended complaint must be filed and served within 10 days of service of the final ruling.

  • Name

    DOE VS SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

  • Case No.

    37-2019-00045907-CU-PO-CTL

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

Defendant's demurrer to the fourth cause of action in the SAC on the ground of failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED without leave to amend. Defendant's motion to strike the punitive damages claim from the SAC is GRANTED without leave to amend.

  • Name

    CHERYL A RICE VS. STACY METZNER

  • Case No.

    56-2018-00508384-CU-OR-VTA

  • Hearing

    Dec 18, 2018

The Court OVERRULES Defendants' Demurrer to the second cause of action on the ground of failure to state a claim. Whether the use of a different "technique" than that to which plaintiff consented constitutes performance of a substantially different procedure is a matter to be resolved by the trier of fact, and is not suitable to resolve on demurrer.

  • Name

    2019-00536982

  • Case No.

    2019-00536982

  • Hearing

    Dec 10, 2020

Defendant's demurrer to the fourth cause of action in the First Amended Complaint on the ground of failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED with leave to amend. Defendant's motion to strike the punitive damages claim from the First Amended Complaint is GRANTED with leave to amend.

  • Name

    CHERYL A RICE VS. STACY METZNER

  • Case No.

    56-2018-00508384-CU-OR-VTA

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2018

22CV403419 FAIRILLIA TURNER vs Shellpoint’s demurrer to the first and fourth causes of action on the grounds of TRINITY FINANCIAL failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED with 10 days’ leave to amend. Shellpoint’s SERVICES LLC demurrer to the second and third causes of action is OVERRULED. Please scroll down to line 2 for full tentative ruling. Court to prepare formal order.

  • Name

    FAIRILLIA TURNER VS TRINITY FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC

  • Case No.

    22CV403419

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2024

  • County

    Santa Clara County, CA

22CV403419 FAIRILLIA TURNER vs Shellpoint’s demurrer to the first and fourth causes of action on the grounds of TRINITY FINANCIAL failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED with 10 days’ leave to amend. Shellpoint’s SERVICES LLC demurrer to the second and third causes of action is OVERRULED. Please scroll down to line 2 for full tentative ruling. Court to prepare formal order.

  • Name

    FAIRILLIA TURNER VS TRINITY FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC

  • Case No.

    22CV403419

  • Hearing

    Feb 07, 2024

  • County

    Santa Clara County, CA

22CV403419 FAIRILLIA TURNER vs Shellpoint’s demurrer to the first and fourth causes of action on the grounds of TRINITY FINANCIAL failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED with 10 days’ leave to amend. Shellpoint’s SERVICES LLC demurrer to the second and third causes of action is OVERRULED. Please scroll down to line 2 for full tentative ruling. Court to prepare formal order.

  • Name

    FAIRILLIA TURNER VS TRINITY FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC

  • Case No.

    22CV403419

  • Hearing

    Feb 09, 2024

  • County

    Santa Clara County, CA

22CV403419 FAIRILLIA TURNER vs Shellpoint’s demurrer to the first and fourth causes of action on the grounds of TRINITY FINANCIAL failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED with 10 days’ leave to amend. Shellpoint’s SERVICES LLC demurrer to the second and third causes of action is OVERRULED. Please scroll down to line 2 for full tentative ruling. Court to prepare formal order.

  • Name

    FAIRILLIA TURNER VS TRINITY FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC

  • Case No.

    22CV403419

  • Hearing

    Feb 08, 2024

  • County

    Santa Clara County, CA

GRANT MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION RE FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, NO DEFECT CITED. GRANT MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION RE DOMINANT MOTIVE. BURDEN SHIFTS ON LANDLORDS' DECLARATIONS OF MOTIVE. NO TRIABLE ISSUE OF FACT. (PHA/CW)

  • Name

    WILLIAM BENTON ET AL VS. STEVEN CASSORLA ET AL

  • Case No.

    CUD02602010

  • Hearing

    Jun 17, 2002

Third Cause of Action for IIED: State Farm's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the third cause of action for IIED should be SUSTAINED, without leave to amend. Plaintiff fails to plead extreme and outrageous conduct necessary to support this cause of action.

  • Name

    RIVAS VS STATE FARM MUTUAL

  • Case No.

    56-2019-00535083-CU-BC-VTA

  • Hearing

    Nov 17, 2020

Defendant's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the second cause of action is OVERRULED. Defendant cannot rely on a check because it falls outside the scope of the pleadings and matters subject to judicial notice. (See Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318; see also CCP, § 430.30, subd. (a).) Contrary to Defendant's assertion, Plaintiffs allege a violation of specific rights in 22 CCR 72527.

  • Name

    STRATMANN VS. VENTURA POST ACUTE

  • Case No.

    56-2018-00511887-CU-PO-VTA

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2018

Defendant's demurrer to each cause of action for failure to state a claim is OVERRULED. Plaintiff has alleged a viable cause of action for breach of contract. Defendant has not proffered arguments to support the demurrer to the remaining causes of action. Defendant's request for a stay is DENIED. Both parties' requests for sanctions are DENIED. This is the second time the parties have filed procedurally deficient, meritless requests for contempt sanctions.

  • Name

    VIRELLA MD VS ROTHSTEIN ESQ

  • Case No.

    56-2017-00501982-CU-CO-VTA

  • Hearing

    Feb 21, 2018

Accordingly, Cross-Defendant's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the first cause of action for negligence is OVERRULED. Breach of Contract Claim: Cross-Complainant asserts that there was a written contract, and alleges facts about the parties' respective duties under that contract. (FACC, ¶¶ 7-9 & 19.)

  • Name

    DENNIS JARVIS VS. PARKS AND RECREATION MANAGEMENT

  • Case No.

    56-2018-00513582-CU-OE-VTA

  • Hearing

    Apr 17, 2019

Accordingly, the demurrer to the fourth cause of action is SUSTAINED for failure to state a claim. D. Fifth Cause of Action – Violation of Civil Code § 2943.

  • Name

    SUPERIOR COURT VS. BANK OF HAWAII

  • Case No.

    20CV363200 Leire Funk v. Bank of Hawaii, et al.

  • Hearing

    Aug 26, 2021

  • Judge

    you may dial 888-251-2909. When prompted enter the access

  • County

    Santa Clara County, CA

The Court intends to OVERRULE Defendants' Demurrer to the second cause of action on the ground of failure to state a claim. Whether the use of a different "technique" than that to which plaintiff consented constitutes performance of a substantially different procedure is a matter to be resolved by the trier of fact, and is not suitable to resolve on demurrer. The Court intends to SUSTAIN Defendants' Demurrer to the third cause of action on the ground of failure to state a claim, with leave to amend.

  • Name

    LAIRD VS CHIU MD

  • Case No.

    56-2019-00536982-CU-MM-VTA

  • Hearing

    Dec 10, 2020

The demurrer to the First Affirmative Defense (Failure to State a Claim) and the Fourth Affirmative Defense (Statute of Limitations) is OVERRULED. An affirmative defense based on the failure to state a claim or statute of limitations does not require that facts be pleaded in support thereof. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 431.30(b)(1); 458.)

  • Name

    LEPOU VS. VERDUZCO

  • Case No.

    30-2020-01164610

  • Hearing

    Mar 01, 2021

Defendants demur to all three causes of action based on the failure to state a claim under Code of Civil Procedure section 430.10(e). Defendants also appear to demur based on uncertainty under section 430.10(f). Defendants’ memorandum cites section 430.10(d), however, there is no argument that there is a defect or misjoinder of parties. Finally, the demurrer includes several other reasons, but these appear to be sub-arguments in support of Defendants’ argument for the failure to state a claim.

  • Name

    YUDOWITZ VS. LEE

  • Case No.

    MSC17-01363

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2018

  • Judge

    Steve K. Austin

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

As such, it is embraced within the general denial and the separate defense of failure to state a claim. 13. The Court SUSTAINS the general demurrer to the Twelfth Affirmative Defense (Not Substantial Motivating Reason) WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND, but WITHOUT PREJUDICE to presenting evidence on this subject at trial.

  • Case No.

    2022-00570159

  • Hearing

    Jan 09, 2023

Overrule demurrer for uncertainty; Sustain w/o leave Reyes' demurrer for failure to state a claim; Sustain w/ leave the demurrers of VDM, Signature, Norton, Rogers, Flores and Ortiz to the 7th c/a for fraud; Overrule the remaining demurrers of VDM, Signature, Norton, Rogers, Flores and Ortiz; Grant Reyes MTS w/ leave to amend; Grant VDM motion to strike punitive damages w/o prejudice for leave to add a prayer for punitive damages after obtaining an order pursuant to CCP 425.13; Grant MTS punitive damages of

  • Name

    COLEGROVE VS AURORA VISTA DEL MAR LLC

  • Case No.

    56-2016-00487490-CU-PO-VTA

  • Hearing

    Sep 14, 2017

The Court SUSTAINS in its entirety Defendant First American Title Trustee Servicing Solutions, LLC's demurrer to the complaint for failure to state a claim: leave to amend by June 21, 2011. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subds. (e).) Plaintiff Althea Ledford does not allege a basis or reason for her entitlement to statutory notification of the present foreclosure proceedings. She is not a named borrower / trustor under the subject deed of trust. (Exh. 1.)

  • Name

    LEDFORD VS FIRST AMERICAN TRUSTEE

  • Case No.

    56-2011-00393676-CU-OR-SIM

  • Hearing

    Jun 07, 2011

Reliable Interiors, Inc. (2004) 119 Cal App 4th 468 are authority to sustain the demurrer for failure to state a claim. =(302/PJM/VC)

  • Name

    INTERSTATE FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY VS. CLEVAND WRECKING COMPANY

  • Case No.

    CGC08475134

  • Hearing

    Sep 08, 2008

The demurrer is sustained without leave to amend as to the First [failure to state a claim], Fourth [no causation], and Fifth [causation] affirmative defenses because they fail to state facts sufficient to constitute a defense. (Code Civ. Proc. sec. 430.20(a).) Affirmative defenses inject new matters into the case, rather than simply being responsive to essential allegations of the complaint. (See Code Civ. Proc. sec. 431.30(b)(2); Walsh v. West Valley Mission Comm. Coll.

  • Name

    EMILY KRAMER VS. CARTA, INC. ET AL

  • Case No.

    CGC20585478

  • Hearing

    Dec 30, 2020

  • County

    San Francisco County, CA

(3) The Demurrer to the Fifth Cause of Action for Accounting based on a failure to state a claim is OVERRULED as to Defendant Ihab M. Hanna, D.D.S., but SUSTAINED with leave to amend as to Defendant Hanna DDS, Inc. “An action for an accounting is equitable in nature.

  • Name

    KARRISHMA B. JUMANI, DDS VS. IHAB M. HANNA, DDS, ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-05067

  • Hearing

    Aug 08, 2021

The demurrer to the first cause of action for failure to state a claim is sustained with leave to amend. Plaintiff has failed to allege sufficient facts for a claim of race or national origin discrimination. Plaintiff is given leave to plead further facts that give rise to his claim that he was treated differently on account of race or national origin, and facts concerning acts of discrimination or retaliation on account of his lack of citizenship.

  • Name

    ANTONIO AMADO VAZ VS. TENDERLOIN HOUSING CLINIC, INC. ET AL

  • Case No.

    CGC12526406

  • Hearing

    Mar 14, 2013

Overrule Defendant's demurrer for failure to state a claim Discussion Demurrer for Uncertainty "A demurrer for uncertainty is strictly construed, even where a complaint is in some respects uncertain, because ambiguities can be clarified under modern discovery procedures." (Khoury v. Maly's of California, Inc. (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 612, 616.)

  • Name

    CHAD TANNER VS. SKY HIGH CAMARILLO LLC

  • Case No.

    56-2017-00503990-CU-PO-VTA

  • Hearing

    Aug 23, 2019

The demurrer is sustained for uncertainty and failure to state a claim pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 430.10(e) and (f). Plaintiff may file a first amended complaint within 15 days. Plaintiff shall serve a copy of the amended complaint on defendants' attorney within 15 days.

  • Name

    MARTHA M WELCH VS HYDER & COMPANY

  • Case No.

    37-2017-00011248-CU-WE-CTL

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2017

TENTATIVE RULING The unopposed demurrer of defendant AmericaCredit Financial Services, Inc. dba GM Financial to plaintiff Eric Ray Castro's complaint is sustained based upon uncertainty and failure to state a claim, with leave to amend. The attachments to the complaint show a payment was made to the U.S. Treasury, rather than defendant, in order to pay off the lease. However, there is no allegation plaintiff complied with the requirements to obtain title after paying the lease balance.

  • Name

    CASTRO VS GM FINANCIAL

  • Case No.

    37-2018-00002594-CU-MC-CTL

  • Hearing

    May 31, 2018

Defendants' demurrer on the ground of failure to state a claim is DENIED. As alleged, each cause of action is sufficient to withstand demurrer.

  • Name

    KALEEM SYED VS. RASHID HAMEED

  • Case No.

    56-2020-00543981-CU-MC-VTA

  • Hearing

    Sep 29, 2020

  • Judge

    Vincent O'Neill

  • County

    Ventura County, CA

  • Type

    Insurance

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' demurrer on the grounds of failure to state a claim and uncertainty is OVERRULED. Plaintiff is ordered to serve notice of the Court's ruling. TENTATIVE RULINGS Page: 2

  • Case No.

    2021-00558081

  • Hearing

    Dec 20, 2021

Tentative ruling for April 4, 2018 on Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings The court DENIES Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings as to Defendants' Answers to the 1st, 7th, 16th, 21st, and 25th causes of action on the ground that failure to state a claim is not a valid affirmative defense. This affirmative defense is valid and one that Plaintiff herself used in her answer to the second amended cross-complaint.

  • Name

    BRADFORD VS TOP LINE MFG INC

  • Case No.

    56-2016-00485308-CU-OE-VTA

  • Hearing

    Apr 04, 2018

  • Judge

    Vincent O'Neill

  • County

    Ventura County, CA

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

The Court intends to OVERRULE Defendants' Demurrer to the second cause of action on the ground of failure to state a claim. Whether the use of a different "technique" than that to which plaintiff consented constitutes performance of a substantially different procedure is a matter to be resolved by the trier of fact, and is not suitable to resolve on demurrer.

  • Name

    2019-00536982

  • Case No.

    2019-00536982

  • Hearing

    Dec 10, 2020

Defendant's demurrer to Plaintiff's breach of contract cause of action for failure to state a claim is sustained without leave to amend. The delayed discovery rule can be applied to contract claims in limited cases. (See e.g. April Enterprises, Inc. v. KTTV (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 805, 828; Weatherly v. Universal Music Pub. Grp. (2004) 125 Cal.App.4th 913, 920.)

  • Name

    ANDREA VILLANUEVA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS GUARDIAN AD ET AL VS. SOUTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY ET AL

  • Case No.

    CGC11512311

  • Hearing

    May 16, 2013

The Court sustains Defendant's demurrer on the ground of failure to state a claim to the premises liability claim, with leave to amend, for failure to plead sufficient facts to support the existence of a legal duty. The fact that the attack was on the premises during business hours is insufficient to show that any employees knew of or could have foreseen the attack.

  • Case No.

    2022-00567884

  • Hearing

    Feb 08, 2023

Defendants' demurrer to the fourth cause of action for interference with economic relationship is sustained for uncertainty and failure to state a claim. Plaintiff did not oppose the demurrer to this cuase of action. Defendants' demurrer to the seventh cause of action for defamation is sustained, with leave to amend. The allegations need to state whether they were oral or written.

  • Name

    MCKAY VS BIO CLEAN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC

  • Case No.

    37-2019-00008613-CU-OE-CTL

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

Failure to State A Claim Defendant contends the action should be dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim. This is not a basis for dismissal pursuant to CCP section 581. Defendant has failed to set forth authority showing a failure to state a claim is a proper basis for dismissing an action in California state court. Furthermore, Defendant has failed to demonstrate that Plaintiff has failed to and cannot state a claim for libel and slander.

  • Name

    JOHN BADEA VS EMIL BOTEZATU

  • Case No.

    17STLC05434

  • Hearing

    May 24, 2018

  • Judge

    Georgina Torres Rizk or Jon R. Takasugi

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

Defendant Lost Hills Sheriff Division demurs, arguing vagueness and failure to state a claim. Additionally, defendant argues Wolford failed to meet the requirements of Government Code §911.2, the Tort Claims Act, requiring a timely written claim prior to filing a complaint. Both are valid grounds. The complaint contains no specific allegations; only a reference to police misconduct and brutality. None of the facts underlying the alleged brutality is detailed.

  • Name

    CHRISTINA WOLFORD VS LOST HILLS SHERIFF DIVISION

  • Case No.

    22SMCV00458

  • Hearing

    Aug 17, 2022

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

The Colony's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the third cause of action is OVERRULED. The contract language at issue is ambiguous because it both refers to "losses and damages to the Protected Premises" and suffered by The Colony "or any third party." (X-Compl., ¶ 18.) Since "any third party" cannot have suffered a loss or damage to the premises, the contract is ambiguous as to whether it includes other personal injuries suffered by third parties.

  • Name

    JANET LENK VS. THE COLONY AT MANDALAY BEACH

  • Case No.

    56-2017-00502080-CU-PO-VTA

  • Hearing

    Jul 03, 2019

Defendant San Diego Public Transportation's unopposed Demurrer to Plaintiffs Jason Levine-Cosby McWilliams and Divina Kaiser's First Amended Complaint is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND based upon uncertainty and failure to state a claim pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 430.10, subsections (e) and (f). The First Amended Complaint does not include any cause of action. There are no facts to support how Defendant can be liable for "mental abuse and sexual harassment against the mentally disabled."

  • Name

    KAISER VS MTS SAN DIEGO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

  • Case No.

    37-2019-00042155-CU-PO-CTL

  • Hearing

    Jan 30, 2020

s ("Ameriquest") demurrer to Plaintiffs Patrick and Debbie Carden's First Amended Complaint ("FAC") in its entirety on grounds of failure to state a claim and uncertainty. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subds. (e) and (f).) There is no opposition. Plaintiffs allege that on February 25, 2005, they purchased real property at 1575 Sycamore Drive in Simi Valley, obtaining their mortgage through Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, inc., ("MERS") and Greenpoint Mortgage Funding. (FAC, ¶¶ 1, 9.)

  • Name

    PATRICK CARDEN VS. GREENPOINT MORTGAGE FUNDING, INC

  • Case No.

    56-2008-00333877-CU-OR-SIM

  • Hearing

    Jul 28, 2009

ISA Contracting Services, Inc.’s Demurrer to First Amended Complaint The Defendant ISA Contracting Services, Inc.’s demurrer to complaint is OVERRULED on all grounds, including failure to state a claim, uncertainty or Labor Code § 3601(a). The allegations of the First Amended are assumed to be true and do not disclose an affirmative defense on their face.

  • Name

    ANGEL VAZQUEZ ET AL. VS SAMUEL ESPINOZA ET AL.

  • Case No.

    18CV-04353

  • Hearing

    Dec 10, 2021

  • County

    Merced County, CA

Tentative ruling for April 3, 2018 on motions by Defendants' (1) Demurrer to the Third Cause of Action in the Complaint (Opposed); (2) Motion to Strike Portions of the Complaint Defendants Patrick Comerford, Michael Weidmann, and Angela Weidman's demurrer for failure to state a claim to the third cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.

  • Name

    ADALBERTO MILAN VS. PATRICK COMERFORD

  • Case No.

    56-2018-00506601-CU-BC-VTA

  • Hearing

    Apr 03, 2018

  • Judge

    Vincent O'Neill

  • County

    Ventura County, CA

The Demurrer to all causes of action for failure to state a claim against Aceituno is OVERRULED. The SAC alleges Defendant Aceituno is an alter ego of corporate Defendants. (SAC ¶¶ 6, 9.)

  • Name

    VELASCO VS. E-TEC

  • Case No.

    30-2019-01097925

  • Hearing

    Sep 14, 2020

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Oct 10, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Aug 29, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    May 22, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Dec 05, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Aug 15, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Oct 31, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Jun 19, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Oct 17, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Jun 26, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Sep 05, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Aug 01, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Aug 07, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Nov 13, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Jan 30, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Nov 28, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Oct 30, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Nov 06, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Nov 21, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Sep 12, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Jan 09, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    May 15, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Nov 14, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Oct 24, 2021

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Jun 12, 2022

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Feb 13, 2022

The Court sets a hearing for an order to show cause for dismissal for failure to state a claim on ______. Dated: December ____, 2022 Hon. Monica Bachner Judge of the Superior Court

  • Name

    IN THE MATTER OF: MICHAEL LOUIS ODDENINO

  • Case No.

    22STCV15630

  • Hearing

    Dec 05, 2022

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

Defendant’s Demurrer to the Seventh Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment based on the failure to state a claim is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. While California courts have disagreed over whether unjust enrichment is a standalone cause of action, more recent California Supreme Court cases have concluded that “unjust enrichment” is not a proper cause of action. (See, e.g., Huskinson & Brown, LLP v.

  • Name

    ALUM ROCK UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. DEL TERRA REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC., ET AL

  • Case No.

    20-CIV-02466

  • Hearing

    Oct 03, 2021

Please wait a moment while we load this page.

New Envelope