What is a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings?

Useful Rulings on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings

Recent Rulings on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS CHARLES PETERS

TENTATIVE RULING Defendant Charles Peters’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, as to Parallel Causes of Action for Violation of Title 3[] of the Beverly Hills Municipal Code is DENIED. Defendant Charles Peters’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, as to Parallel Causes of Action for Violation of Title 10 of the Beverly Hills Municipal Code is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

RE: PET'N FOR INSTRUCTIONS, TERM OF POWERS, REQ TO RTN

Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings re: Rodney Batongbacal’s Petition for Instructions filed 6-8-20 is set for hearing 10-08-20. PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: 1. Proof of Publication. PrC § 8120 2. Verified declaration by petitioner stating relationships of heirs listed in Item #8 of petition. PrC § 8002 Note: Bond will be fixed at $20,000.00, as petitioner is an out-of-state resident.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

YAN LI VS APRIL LI

“[E]ven if the proposed legal theory is a novel one, ‘the preferable practice would be to permit the amendment and allow the parties to test its legal sufficiency by demurrer motion for judgment on the pleadings or other appropriate proceedings.’” (Id., quoting California Casualty Gen. Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 274, 281.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

GUILFORD VS. BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

The instant motion for judgment on the pleadings is moot. Plaintiff to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2020

CARTER VS. FENTON, JR.

HEARING ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS FILED BY HARVEY FENTON JR., et al. * TENTATIVE RULING: * Motion withdrawn per email from moving party.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

ROEBBELEN VS. WEST CONTRA COSTA U.S.D.

HEARING ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS FILED BY WEST CONTRA COSTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT * TENTATIVE RULING: * Continued to July 9, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. by stipulation of the parties.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

WX BRANDS, INC. VS STATEWIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY, INC.

In the alternative, Plaintiff seeks judgment on the pleadings. Plaintiff served Defendant’s agent for service of process, whom former defense counsel had identified in the order granting the motion to be relieved as counsel. Defendant did not file an opposition. “The grounds for a motion to strike shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 437, subd. (a).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

  • Judge

    Laura A. Seigle or Elizabeth Allen White

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ALEXIS ATHERTON VS FLINKMAN PARTNERS, LLP

As such, Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED, as to the request for punitive and exemplary damages.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

PATRICIA ANN EMERY ET AL VS JENNY MARCHICK ET AL

For instance, Defendant Bank of America, N.A. filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings on December 27, 2018, which was set for a January 22, 2019 hearing. Plaintiff’s counsel includes in its billing records time spent on litigating this motion. (See Declaration of Michael C. Lieb, Exh. 1, 1/3/2019, 1/4/2019, 1/8/2019, 1/15/2019, 1/16/2019, 1/22/2019 entries.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

PARK V. THE ERDTSIECK FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

The motion of the defendants for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED. The pleadings indicate that Littlemoon, Inc., is the party to the loan agreement and the deed of trust securing the property, not the plaintiff in her individual capacity, and thus the plaintiff does not have standing.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

GROVES, ET AL. V. ZIEVE, BRODNAX & STEELE, ET AL.

Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings TENTATIVE RULING Defendant Zieve, Broadnax and Steele’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied. Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings of the second cause of action for conversion is denied. Conversion is the wrongful exercise of dominion over the property of another.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY V. SCOTT

Code of Civil Procedure section 438 (b) states that a “party” may move for judgment on the pleadings.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

KATIE O CONNELL MARSH VS GAUMONT TELEVISION USA LLC

The summary judgment proceeding is thereby necessarily transmuted into a test of the pleadings and the summary judgment motion into a motion for judgment on the pleadings.” (Id.) The Court, on its own motion, takes judicial notice of its February 24, 2020 ruling with respect to the demurrer and motion to strike in connection with the SAXC.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

BOLUN ALLEN DENG VS JOSEPH LIU, ET AL.

“‘Following an order sustaining a demurrer or a motion for judgment on the pleadings with leave to amend, the plaintiff may amend his or her complaint only as authorized by the court’s order. [Citation.]’” (Zakk v. Diesel (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 431, 456.) If an amended pleading is filed after the time allowed, a party may obtain an order striking the amended pleading by way of noticed motion in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure section 1010. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1320, subd. (i).) 2.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

CARLO LLC VS 4518 HOLLYWOOD LLC

Defendant now moves for a judgment on the pleadings. Legal Standard A motion for judgment on the pleadings has the same function as a general demurrer but is made after the time for demurrer has expired. Except as provided by Code of Civil Procedure section 438, the rules governing demurrers apply.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

SANTA BARBARA INLAND & COASTAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ASSOCIATION V. CITY OF SANTA BARBARA

Order: The Court denies defendant City of Santa Barbara’s motion for judgment on the pleadings or, in the alternative, to strike certain allegations.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

GRETCHEN CARPENTER VS MANHATTAN BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (CCP § 438, et seq. ) TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiff Gretchen Carpenter’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is PLACED OFF CALENDAR. The action is RECLASSIFIED as an unlimited jurisdiction case and is transferred to the transfer/reclassification desk for collection of fees and reassignment. Plaintiff is ordered to pay the reclassification fee within ten (10) days of this order.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE VS ROBERTO JARAMILLO

JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (CCP § 438) TENTATIVE RULING: Cross-Defendant Elise Aube’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings on the Cross-Complaint is GRANTED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. ANALYSIS: On August 14, 2018, Plaintiff Farmers Insurance Exchange (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for automobile subrogation against Defendant Roberto Jamarillo (“Cross-Complainant”).

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

JASON POST VS MELISSA SCHWARTZ ET AL

Prior to the reassignment, on March 20, 2019, the Court issued an order on its motion setting a court’s motion to strike or for a judgment on the pleadings as to the entire Complaint under Code of Civil Procedure sections 436 and 438. The Court granted Post leave to file a proposed amended complaint to address the defects identified by the Court in its minute order. On May 7, 2019, the Court continued the hearing on its motions to give Post another opportunity to file a proposed amended pleading.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

BEE SWEET CITRUS, INC. V. STYLE-LINE CONSTRUCTION, INC., ET AL.

Accordingly, the motion for judgment on the pleadings would have been granted even if the statute of limitations had not expired. Judgment on the pleadings is still warranted on the basis that Style-Line has no right to indemnity in the first place, because Kingspan cannot be held jointly liable in tort to Bee Sweet. (See Prince v.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

JOSE CABRERA, ET AL. VS LOIS M. EDWARDS, ET AL.

The better method is to allow the amendment and permit the opposing party to demurrer or file a motion for judgment on the pleadings. (Atkinson v. Elk Corp. (2006) 109 Cal.App.4th 739, 760.) The court finds that judicial efficiency favors resolving all of the parties’ disputed matters in the same lawsuit. Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are ordered to file and serve the FAC within 5 days.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

BARRY REGENSTEIN VS ROBERT S. ELLIN, ET AL.

The motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the sixteenth cause of action is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CLARE V. WAL-MART STORES, INC.

Even if there were intervening events and other potential causes for plaintiff’s death, such information is not included in the proposed amended complaint, and it would be best to use other means, such as a demurrer, motion for judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment motion, to determine whether plaintiff is actually able to state a claim and recover damages against defendant.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

DISCOVER BANK VS. HERNANDEZ

HEARING ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS FILED BY DISCOVER BANK * TENTATIVE RULING: * Plaintiff Discover Bank has moved for judgment on the pleadings. The court grants the motion for the reasons stated below. The reasons are: 1. The Defendant had filed no opposition to the motion; and 2. The Defendant’s answer filed on November 27, 2019 admits that Defendant owes the debt that is the subject of this lawsuit and raises no defense to the complaint.

  • Hearing

    Jun 29, 2020

  • Judge

    Burch

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Defendant’s counsel saw the error and capitalized on it with the Motion for judgment on the pleadings. The motion was well taken and the case was voluntarily dismissed prior to the hearing.” Opposition pg. 2:5-10.) “In determining the amount of reasonable attorney fees to be awarded under a statutory attorney fees provision, the trial court begins by calculating the “lodestar” amount. (Ketchum, supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 1131, 104 Cal.Rptr.2d 377, 17 P.3d 735; Meister v.

  • Hearing

    Jun 29, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 320     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.