Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 21STCV17377, Date: 2022-09-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV17377    Hearing Date: September 28, 2022    Dept: 28

Defendant Knight-Calabasas, LLC’s Demurrer with Motion to Strike 

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

BACKGROUND

On May 7, 2021, Plaintiff Stephen Joseph Finfer (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Joe King (“King”) and Knight-Calabasas, LLC dba Calabasas Country Club (“Calabasas”) for motor vehicle negligence and general negligence.

On August 5, 2022, Calabasas filed a Demurrer with Motion to Strike to be heard on September 28, 2022.

Trial is scheduled for June 16, 2023.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Calabasas requests the Court sustain the demurrer to the entire complaint and strike the statement “the defendants who entrust the motor vehicle are Calabasas Country Club” and the second cause of action.

LEGAL STANDARD

CCP § 430.10 states: “The party against whom a complaint or cross-complaint has been filed may object, by demurrer or answer as provided in Section 430.30, to the pleading on any one or more of the following grounds: (a) The court has no jurisdiction of the subject of the cause of action alleged in the pleading; (b) The person who filed the pleading does not have the legal capacity to sue; (c) There is another action pending between the same parties on the same cause of action; (d) There is a defect or misjoinder of parties; (e) The pleading does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; (f) The pleading is uncertain. As used in this subdivision, “uncertain” includes ambiguous and unintelligible; and (g) In an action founded upon a contract, it cannot be ascertained from the pleading whether the contract is written, is oral, or is implied by conduct.”

A demurrer for sufficiency tests whether the complaint states a cause of action.  (Hahn v. Mirda (2007) 147 Cal. App. 4th 740, 747.)  When considering demurrers, courts read the allegations liberally and in context.  (Taylor v. City of Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power (2006) 144 Cal. App. 4th 1216, 1228.)  In a demurrer proceeding, the defects must be apparent on the face of the pleading or by proper judicial notice.  (CCP § 430.30(a).)  A demurrer tests the pleadings alone and not the evidence or other extrinsic matters.  (SKF Farms v. Superior Court (1984) 153 Cal. App. 3d 902, 905.)  Therefore, it lies only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed.  (Id.)  The only issue involved in a demurrer hearing is whether the complaint, as it stands, unconnected with extraneous matters, states a cause of action.  (Hahn, 147 Cal.App.4th at 747.)

“[I]t is generally recognized that one who places or entrusts his [or her] motor vehicle in the hands of one whom he [or she] knows, or from the circumstances is charged with knowing, is incompetent or unfit to drive, may be held liable for an injury inflicted by the use made thereof by that driver, provided the plaintiff can establish that the injury complained of was proximately caused by the driver’s disqualification, incompetency, inexperience or recklessness . . . .” (Flores v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 1055, 1063.)

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that King negligently drove a vehicle owned by Calabasas resulting in injuries to Plaintiff, who was a passenger in the subject vehicle. All claims against Calabasas are made on the basis of negligent entrustment.

In order to state a cause of action based on negligent entrustment, Plaintiff must allege that the subject party entrusted the vehicle to the driving individual with actual or constructive knowledge that the driving party was unfit to drive. Plaintiff makes no such allegation here, merely stating that Calabasas entrusted the vehicle to King. Neither cause of action is sufficiently pled. The Court sustains the demurrer as to the entire complaint.

As the Court sustains the demurrer to the entire complaint, the motion to strike is moot.

CONCLUSION

Defendant Knight-Calabasas, LLC’s Demurrer is SUSTAINED, with 30 days leave to amend.

Defendant Knight-Calabasas, LLC’s Motion to Strike is MOOT.

            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.