HEARING DATE: February 6, 2020
CASE NUMBER: 19STCV37935
CASE NAME: Brandon Hartley v. Strategic Partners, Inc.
MOVING PARTY: Defendant, Strategic Partners, Inc.
OPPOSING PARTY: Plaintiff Brandon Hartley
TRIAL DATE: None
PROOF OF SERVICE: OK
MOTION: Defendant’s Demurrer to the Complaint
OPPOSITION: January 24, 2020
REPLY: January 30, 2020
TENTATIVE: Defendant’s Demurrer to the Complaint is SUSTAINED. Plaintiff is given leave to amend within 30 days of this date.
BACKGROUND
This action arises out of Plaintiff, Brandon Hartley’s (“Plaintiff”) alleged employment as a model with Defendant, Strategic Partners, Inc. (“Defendant”). Plaintiff alleges that he is a model who “earns a living by modeling and offering the use of his image and likeness for the promotion of products and services in exchange for compensation.” Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant is a “company focused on the marketing of products” and the “end user” of his services as a model. Plaintiff alleges that he
Hearing Date
February 06, 2020
Type
Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
HEARING DATE: February 6, 2020
CASE NUMBER: 19STCV37935
CASE NAME: Brandon Hartley v. Strategic Partners, Inc.
MOVING PARTY: Defendant, Strategic Partners, Inc.
OPPOSING PARTY: Plaintiff Brandon Hartley
TRIAL DATE: None
PROOF OF SERVICE: OK
MOTION: Defendant’s Demurrer to the Complaint
OPPOSITION: January 24, 2020
REPLY: January 30, 2020
TENTATIVE: Defendant’s Demurrer to the Complaint is SUSTAINED. Plaintiff is given leave to amend within 30 days of this date.
BACKGROUND
This action arises out of Plaintiff, Brandon Hartley’s (“Plaintiff”) alleged employment as a model with Defendant, Strategic Partners, Inc. (“Defendant”). Plaintiff alleges that he is a model who “earns a living by modeling and offering the use of his image and likeness for the promotion of products and services in exchange for compensation.” Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant is a “company focused on the marketing of products” and the “end user” of his services as a model. Plaintiff alleges that he