DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT by defendants Vortex Maintenance, Inc. and Sergio Elizarraras is OVERRULED.
Defendant failed to file a meet and confer declaration as required by CCP § 430.41(a). The court expects counsel to know and comply with all procedural rules.
In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint against a general demurrer, the court is guided by long-settled rules. The demurrer is treated as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law. We also consider matters which may be judicially noticed. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318) Defendants' request for judicial notice of the existence of the court records is granted. (See, Fremont Indemnity Co. v. Fremont General Corp. (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 97, 113) Attorney Garland's reply declaration as to her interpretation of what occurred at an ex parte hearing is extrinsic evidence that is not considered on demurrer. (See, Ion Equip. corp. v.
Hearing Date
March 05, 2020
Category
Civil - Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT by defendants Vortex Maintenance, Inc. and Sergio Elizarraras is OVERRULED.
Defendant failed to file a meet and confer declaration as required by CCP § 430.41(a). The court expects counsel to know and comply with all procedural rules.
In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint against a general demurrer, the court is guided by long-settled rules. The demurrer is treated as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law. We also consider matters which may be judicially noticed. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318) Defendants' request for judicial notice of the existence of the court records is granted. (See, Fremont Indemnity Co. v. Fremont General Corp. (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 97, 113) Attorney Garland's reply declaration as to her interpretation of what occurred at an ex parte hearing is extrinsic evidence that is not considered on demurrer. (See, Ion Equip. corp. v.