Judge: Douglas W. Stern, Case: 22STCP02330, Date: 2023-01-26 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCP02330 Hearing Date: January 26, 2023 Dept: 68
Vonneisha McMurray vs. Officer Nicholas Hernandez, et al., Case No. 22STCP02330
MOVING
PARTY: Defendant City of
Lancaster
RESPONDING
PARTY: Plaintiff Vonneisha McMurray
MOTION: Demurrer to Complaint
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff
is a pro per litigant suing Defendant City of Lancaster and other defendants
based on multiple causes of action, including false imprisonment and illegal
search and seizure. Defendant City of Lancaster is an incorporated city in
California and is a public entity.
This
action was originally filed by Plaintiff on June 21, 2022. Defendant filed this
Demurrer on December 5, 2022. No opposition has been filed by Plaintiff.
Defendant demurs to Plaintiff’s entire
complaint on the basis that Plaintiff failed to allege in her complaint that Plaintiff
had filed a claim with Defendant within 6 months of the date of the incident.
ANALYSIS
As a general matter, in a demurrer
proceeding, the defects must be apparent on the face of the pleading or via
proper judicial notice. (Donabedian
v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994.) “A demurrer
tests the pleading alone, and not the evidence or facts alleged.” (E-Fab, Inc. v. Accountants, Inc. Servs. (2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 1308, 1315.) As
such, the court assumes the truth of the complaint’s properly pleaded or
implied factual allegations. (Id.)
The only issue a demurrer is concerned with is whether the complaint, as it
stands, states a cause of action. (Hahn
v. Mirda (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 740,
747.)
Where a demurrer is sustained, leave to amend
must be allowed where there is a reasonable possibility of successful
amendment. (Goodman v. Kennedy (1976)
18 Cal.3d 335, 348.) The burden is on the plaintiff to show the court that a
pleading can be amended successfully. (Id.;
Lewis v. YouTube, LLC (2015) 244 Cal.App.4th 118, 226.) However, “[i]f
there is any reasonable possibility that the plaintiff can state a good cause
of action, it is error to sustain a demurrer without leave to amend.” (Youngman v. Nevada Irrigation Dist.
(1969) 70 Cal.2d 240, 245).
Government Code
Sections 900 to 915 require that in order for a plaintiff to proceed with an
action for the recovery of damages based upon tort theories against a public
entity, a claim must be filed with the defendant entity within six months of
the date of the incident. Government Code Section 905 requires that the plaintiff’s
complaint contain language alleging that a government claim has been filed.
There is no
language in Plaintiff’s Complaint indicating that Plaintiff has complied with
Government Code Sections 900 to 915 and filed a claim with Defendant City of
Lancaster, which is a public entity. As such, Plaintiff cannot maintain any
causes of action against Defendant City of Lancaster.
Accordingly, Defendant’s Demurrer as to Plaintiff’s Complaint is
sustained with leave to amend. Plaintiff
is granted 20 days leave to amend.