Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
DEPARTMENT 17
TENTATIVE RULING
NINA MONTOYA vs. OLUFEMI OGUNTOLU, et al.
Case No.: 20STCV09322
Hearing Date: December 4, 2020
Defendant Oguntolu’s demurrer is SUSTAINED. The demurrer is SUSTAINED, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND as to the second cause of action; the demurrer is SUSTAINED, WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND as to the third cause of action. Accordingly, Defendant Oguntolu’s motion to strike is MOOT.
On March 6, 2020, Plaintiff Nina Montoya (Plaintiff) initiated this action. On June 15, 2020, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint (FAC) against Olufemi Oguntolu (Oguntolu) and Citibank N.A (Citibank), alleging: (1) partition of real property; (2) accounting; and (3) declaratory relief.
Oguntolu now demurs to Plaintiff’s second and third causes of action.
Legal Standard
A demurrer for sufficiency tests whether the complaint states a cause of action.¿ (Hahn v. Mirda (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 740, 747 (Hahn).) ¿When considering demurrers,
Hearing Date
December 04, 2020
Type
Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure) (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
DEPARTMENT 17
TENTATIVE RULING
NINA MONTOYA vs. OLUFEMI OGUNTOLU, et al.
Case No.: 20STCV09322
Hearing Date: December 4, 2020
Defendant Oguntolu’s demurrer is SUSTAINED. The demurrer is SUSTAINED, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND as to the second cause of action; the demurrer is SUSTAINED, WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND as to the third cause of action. Accordingly, Defendant Oguntolu’s motion to strike is MOOT.
On March 6, 2020, Plaintiff Nina Montoya (Plaintiff) initiated this action. On June 15, 2020, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint (FAC) against Olufemi Oguntolu (Oguntolu) and Citibank N.A (Citibank), alleging: (1) partition of real property; (2) accounting; and (3) declaratory relief.
Oguntolu now demurs to Plaintiff’s second and third causes of action.
Legal Standard
A demurrer for sufficiency tests whether the complaint states a cause of action.¿ (Hahn v. Mirda (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 740, 747 (Hahn).) ¿When considering demurrers,