The Complaint is not premature.

The contracts in the present case were for services to be provided for a one-time event, on a specified date, which was rendered impossible as a result of the government orders restricting gatherings of the contemplated capacity of guests. The parties were thereby excused from performance based on impossibility, and there are no provisions in the contracts indicating Plaintiffs must resort to an alternate date. “The object of a contract must be possible and ascertainable by the time the contract is to be performed.” (Civ. Code, §§1595, 1597, 1596.) Where a contract has a single object that is wholly impossible of performance, or so vaguely expressed as to be wholly unascertainable, the entire contract is void. (Civ. Code, §1598) Here, the single object of the contract was to provide services for a wedding on April 05, 2020, which became impossible by operation of law, thereby excusing the parties’ obligations.

1COA and 2COA (Breach of K): The Demurrer