Defendant Tsasu LLC’s Demurrer to the first and second causes of action for Quiet Title and Declaratory Relief in Plaintiffs Tommy Do and Cindy Lien Dang’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), is sustained with 15 days leave to amend.
Defendant Tsasu LLC’s request for judicial notice of the documents recorded with the Orange county Recorder’s Office (Exhs. 1-8), is granted. (Evid. Code, § 452.)
Quiet Title
An element of a cause of action for quiet title is ‘[t]he adverse claims to the title of the plaintiff against which a determination is sought. (Code Civ. Proc., § 761.020, subd. (c).) If the plaintiff admits the validity of any adverse claim, the complaint must also contain that admission. This enables the action to determine the title against all persons, with specified exceptions, and avoids the need to litigate interests accepted as valid and to which the plaintiff's title is subject. (Code Civ. Proc., § 762.060, subd. (c).) Plaintiff’s FAC does not allege the requirements of section
Hearing Date
February 16, 2018
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Defendant Tsasu LLC’s Demurrer to the first and second causes of action for Quiet Title and Declaratory Relief in Plaintiffs Tommy Do and Cindy Lien Dang’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), is sustained with 15 days leave to amend.
Defendant Tsasu LLC’s request for judicial notice of the documents recorded with the Orange county Recorder’s Office (Exhs. 1-8), is granted. (Evid. Code, § 452.)
Quiet Title
An element of a cause of action for quiet title is ‘[t]he adverse claims to the title of the plaintiff against which a determination is sought. (Code Civ. Proc., § 761.020, subd. (c).) If the plaintiff admits the validity of any adverse claim, the complaint must also contain that admission. This enables the action to determine the title against all persons, with specified exceptions, and avoids the need to litigate interests accepted as valid and to which the plaintiff's title is subject. (Code Civ. Proc., § 762.060, subd. (c).) Plaintiff’s FAC does not allege the requirements of section