Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 22STCV026664, Date: 2023-05-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV026664    Hearing Date: May 24, 2023    Dept: 28

Plaintiff Keilah Catalan’s Motion to Strike

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On August 17, 2022, Plaintiff Keilah Catalan (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Harvest Rock Church (“Defendant”) for general negligence and premises liability.

On November 17, 2022, Defendant filed an answer.

On April 24, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Strike to be heard on May 24, 2023.

Trial is currently scheduled for February 14, 2024.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Plaintiff requests the Court strike Defendant’s answer and either enter default or order Defendant to file an amended answer. Plaintiff also requests the Court impose sanctions of $910.00.

LEGAL STANDARD

“Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof, but this time limitation shall not apply to motions specified in subdivision (e).” (CCP § 435(b)(1), italics added.) “A notice of motion to strike must be given within the time allowed to plead, and if a demurrer is interposed, concurrently therewith, and must be noticed for hearing and heard at the same time as the demurrer.” (CRC 3.1322(b), italic added.) “The defendant shall answer the amendments, or the

complaint as amended, within 30 days after service thereof, or such other time as the court may direct, and judgment by default may be entered upon failure to answer, as in other cases.” (CCP § 471.5(a).)

“The grounds for a motion to strike shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice.” (CCP § 437(a).) The court looks to whether “the complaint alleges facts sufficient to state a cause of action or discloses a complete defense.” (Ivanoff, supra, 9 Cal.App.5th p. 725.) The court “assume[s] the truth of the properly pleaded factual allegations, facts that reasonably can be inferred from those expressly pleaded and matters of which judicial notice has been taken.” (Id.) “The court does not, however, assume the truth of contentions, deductions or conclusions of law. [Citation.]” (Durell v. Sharp Healthcare (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 1350, 1358.)

CCP § 446 provides, “[w]hen the complaint is verified, the answer shall be verified.” CCP § 431.30(d) states, “(d) If the complaint is...not verified, a general denial is sufficient but only puts in issue the material allegations of the complaint. If the complaint is verified... the denial of the allegations shall be made positively or according to the information and belief of the defendant.

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff’s complaint was verified by Plaintiff, meaning that a general denial is insufficient in place of an answer. Defendant’s answer explicitly states, under the “GENERAL DENIAL” header, that “Defendant denies generally and specifically every allegation contained in Plaintiff’s Complaint...” Defendant’s answer must be properly tailored to the allegations of the complaint. The Court strikes the answer, with leave to amend.

The Court will not impose the requested sanctions. Plaintiff provided no legal basis for the requested sanctions, only citing that Defendant did not answer Plaintiff’s attempt to meet and confer. This is insufficient to warrant sanctions.

CONCLUSION

Plaintiff Keilah Catalan’s Motion to Strike is GRANTED, with 30 days leave to amend.

Plaintiff Keilah Catalan’s Request for Sanctions is DENIED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Moving Party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.

The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.