SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT
JOSE FLORES, etc., Plaintiff, vs. THE CALIFORNIA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION, etc., et al., Defendants.
CASE NO.: 20STCV31994
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT
Date: October 23, 2020
Time: 8:30 a.m.
Dept. 56
MOVING PARTY: Defendant State Bar of California[1]
RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Jose Flores
The Court has considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed a complaint arising from an alleged disciplinary complaint filed with Defendant against Plaintiff’s former counsel, Gerald Neil Silver (“Silver”), alleging causes of action for: (1) negligence; (2) legal malpractice; (3) fraud; (4) breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; and (5) negligent infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff alleges that various employees of Defendant acted negligently and improperly in prosecuting Plaintiff’s disciplinary complaint, on Plaintiff’s beha
Hearing Date
October 23, 2020
Type
Fraud (no contract) (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT
JOSE FLORES, etc., Plaintiff, vs. THE CALIFORNIA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION, etc., et al., Defendants.
CASE NO.: 20STCV31994
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT
Date: October 23, 2020
Time: 8:30 a.m.
Dept. 56
MOVING PARTY: Defendant State Bar of California[1]
RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Jose Flores
The Court has considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed a complaint arising from an alleged disciplinary complaint filed with Defendant against Plaintiff’s former counsel, Gerald Neil Silver (“Silver”), alleging causes of action for: (1) negligence; (2) legal malpractice; (3) fraud; (4) breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; and (5) negligent infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff alleges that various employees of Defendant acted negligently and improperly in prosecuting Plaintiff’s disciplinary complaint, on Plaintiff’s beha