Judge: Daniel S. Murphy, Case: 22STCV19827, Date: 2022-10-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV19827    Hearing Date: October 24, 2022    Dept: 32

BACKGROUND

            On June 17, 2022, Plaintiff Latina Young filed a complaint for breach of contract against Nancy Watson. Defendant presently demurs to the complaint on the grounds that it fails to state a cause of action and is ambiguous and unintelligible. Defendant also moves to strike the complaint for the same reason.

LEGAL STANDARD

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. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.30, subd. (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. (Ibid.) 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, supra, 147 Cal.App.4th at 747.) A demurrer for uncertainty is granted “if the pleading is so incomprehensible that a defendant cannot reasonably respond.” (A.J. Fistes Corp. v. GDL Best Contractors, Inc. (2019) 38 Cal.App.5th 677, 695.) Usually, a complaint does not need to be a “model of clarity” to survive a demurrer because most ambiguities can be clarified through discovery. (Ibid.)

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 of that pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (b).) The court may, upon a motion, or at any time in its discretion, and upon terms it deems proper, strike (1) any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading and (2) all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of this state, a court rule, or an order of the court. (Id., § 436.) The grounds for moving to strike must appear on the face of the pleading or by way of judicial notice. (Id., § 437.)

MEET AND CONFER

Before filing a demurrer or a motion to strike, the demurring or moving party is required to meet and confer with the party who filed the pleading demurred to or the pleading that is subject to the motion to strike for the purposes of determining whether an agreement can be reached through a filing of an amended pleading that would resolve the objections to be raised in the demurrer. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 430.41, 435.5.) The Court notes that Defendant has complied with the meet and confer requirement. (See Watson Decl.)

DISCUSSION

            Plaintiff’s complaint consists of a two-page block of text with incomplete sentences and no discernible facts demonstrating the existence of a contract or its breach. The remaining 90 pages of the complaint consist of exhibits with no description and no discernable connection to a breach of contract. The complaint is both factually insufficient and unintelligible. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10(e), (f).) Plaintiff’s “Notice of Objection” to the demurrer and motion to strike offers no support for her complaint, making no mention of breach of contract or any cause of action.

CONCLUSION

            Defendant’s demurrer is SUSTAINED with leave to amend. The motion to strike is denied as moot.