Judge: Barbara M. Scheper, Case: 21STCV27073, Date: 2022-07-29 Tentative Ruling




Case Number: 21STCV27073    Hearing Date: July 29, 2022    Dept: 30

Dept. 30

Calendar No.

Erickson vs. Coastline Real Estate Advisors, Inc., et. al., Case No. 21STCV27073

 

Tentative Ruling re:  Defendants’ Motion to Strike

 

Defendants Ming Management, Inc. and South Bay Highlands, LP (collectively, Defendants) move to strike the allegations related to attorney’s fees in the Complaint of Plaintiff Amalia Erickson (Plaintiff). The motion is granted.

 

Any party may file a timely notice of a motion to strike the whole or any part of a pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (b).) The motion may seek to strike any “irrelevant, false or improper matter inserted in any pleading” or any part of the pleading “not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of this state, a court rule, or an order of the court.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 436.) Irrelevant allegations include allegations that are not essential to the statement of a claim, allegations that are not pertinent to or supported by the claim and demands for judgment requesting relief not supported by the allegations. (Code Civ. Proc., § 431.10, subds. (b), (c).)

“[W]hen a substantive defect is clear from the face of a complaint, such as a violation of the applicable statute of limitations or a purported claim of right which is legally invalid, a defendant may attack that portion of the cause of action by filing a motion to strike.” (PH II, Inc. v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1680, 1682–1683.)

“[A]s a general rule, attorney fees are not recoverable as costs unless they are authorized by statute or agreement.” (People ex rel. Dept. of Corporations v. Speedee Oil Change Systems, Inc. (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 424, 429.) “In any action on a contract, where the contract specifically provides that attorney’s fees and costs, which are incurred to enforce that contract, shall be awarded either to one of the parties or to the prevailing party, then the party who is determined to be the party prevailing on the contract, whether he or she is the party specified in the contract or not, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees in addition to other costs.” (Civ. Code § 1717, subd. (a).)

 

            In the Complaint, Plaintiff seeks recovery of attorney’s fees under her cause of action for negligence. (Comp. ¶ 43, Prayer 5.) Plaintiff’s claim arises out of allegations that Defendants knew of unsafe conditions in the apartment unit that she rented from Defendants and negligently failed to maintain the unit. (Comp. ¶¶ 38-42.)

Plaintiff has attached to the Complaint photographs of the written lease agreement for the apartment unit (the Agreement). (Comp. ¶ 17, Ex. A.) Section 17 of the Agreement reads as follows:

Legal Fees: In the event of any legal action taken by Owner arising out of this Agreement, Resident shall pay reasonable attorney’s fees and costs in addition to all other relief. If legal action is commenced for nonpayment of rent and Owner agrees to accept rent at any point during the action, Resident is responsible and must also pay attorney’s fees, costs accrued to date in order to reinstate tenancy.

 

(Comp. Ex. A.)

 

Plaintiff seeks recovery of attorney’s fees based on the reciprocal application of this section. (Civ. Code § 1717, subd. (a).)

 

In the picture of the Agreement attached to the Complaint, there is an “X” pencil-marked across Section 17. (Comp. Ex. A.) Defendants argue based on this “X” that Section 17 should not be considered part of the Agreement. The Court agrees.

 

While the Complaint must be construed liberally, “[w]here a written instrument is unambiguous and incorporated by reference into a complaint, any allegations in the pleading inconsistent with the incorporated writing may be stricken.” (Nichols v. Canoga Industries (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 956, 965.) Here, the alteration to Section 17 of the Agreement appears on the face of the incorporated exhibit and contradicts Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees. Because the alteration is unambiguous and no allegations account for the alteration, contrary to Plaintiff’s suggestion in the Opposition, the Court cannot presume here that the “X” was made after the Agreement’s execution or without Plaintiff’s consent. (See Evid. Code § 1402 [“The party producing a writing as genuine which has been altered, or appears to have been altered, after its execution, in a part material to the question in dispute, must account for the alteration or appearance thereof”].)

The motion to strike is granted without prejudice to Plaintiff seeking leave to amend to include a request for attorney’s fees if facts are developed during discovery which would support such a request.