Judge: Daniel S. Murphy, Case: 23STCV02040, Date: 2023-08-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV02040    Hearing Date: August 18, 2023    Dept: 32

BACKGROUND

            On January 31, 2023, Plaintiff CRB Workforce, LLC filed this action against Defendant Xela LLC for (1) breach of contract and (2) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The complaint alleges that the parties entered into an agreement whereby Plaintiff would recruit and refer employees to Defendant in exchange for a fee. The action arises from Defendant’s alleged failure to pay the requisite fee.

            On February 28, 2023, Defendant filed an answer to the complaint, admitting all of the allegations except two. Defendant denies paragraph 13 of the complaint because it has no record of saying “thanks for your patience” in response to a payment request. (Answer ¶ 3(b).) Defendant also denies paragraph 14 of the complaint, claiming that it cannot pay the balance in full due to a reduction in business and wishes to pay in installments.  

            On May 30, 2023, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for summary judgment based on Defendant’s admission. Defendant has not filed an opposition.

LEGAL STANDARD

The function of a motion for summary judgment or adjudication is to allow a determination as to whether an opposing party cannot show evidentiary support for a pleading or claim and to enable an order of summary dismissal without the need for trial. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 843.) Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (c) “requires the trial judge to grant summary judgment if all the evidence submitted, and ‘all inferences reasonably deducible from the evidence’ and uncontradicted by other inferences or evidence, show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” (Adler v. Manor Healthcare Corp. (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1110, 1119.) “The function of the pleadings in a motion for summary judgment is to delimit the scope of the issues; the function of the affidavits or declarations is to disclose whether there is any triable issue of fact within the issues delimited by the pleadings.” (Juge v. County of Sacramento (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th 59, 67, citing FPI Development, Inc. v. Nakashima (1991) 231 Cal. App. 3d 367, 381-382.)

DISCUSSION

            To establish breach of contract, a plaintiff must show: (1) the contract existed, (2) the plaintiff’s performance of the contract or excuse for nonperformance, (3) the defendant’s breach, and (4) the resulting damage to the plaintiff. (Richman v. Hartley (2014) 224 Cal.App.4th 1182, 1186.) “The covenant of good faith and fair dealing, implied by law in every contract, exists merely to prevent one contracting party from unfairly frustrating the other party’s right to receive the benefits of the agreement actually made.” (Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 349-50.)

            If a defendant “admit[s] the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint . . . no further proof of liability is required.” (Carlsen v. Koivumaki (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 879, 898.) Here, Defendant’s answer admits all material allegations, including: (1) a contract existed between the parties (Compl. ¶ 16); (2) Plaintiff performed under the contract (id., ¶¶ 17-19); (3) Defendant breached the contract by failing to pay the fee (id., ¶ 20); and (4) Defendant did not act fairly and in good faith when it interfered with Plaintiff’s right to payment under the contract (id., ¶ 27). These admissions establish Defendant’s liability for both causes of action as a matter of law. Additionally, Plaintiff has undisputed evidence of the requisite facts. (UF 1-11, 24-25.) Because Defendant’s liability is uncontested, summary judgment is warranted.

CONCLUSION

            Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.