Judge: Elaine W. Mandel, Case: 22SMCV02169, Date: 2023-05-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22SMCV02169    Hearing Date: May 18, 2023    Dept: P

Tentative Ruling

Rader v. Demarest et al., Case No. 22SMCV02169 (related case 22SMCV02409)

Hearing Date May 18, 2023

Defendant Demarest’s Motions to Strike Punitive Damages

Plaintiffs Rader and Bauer allege defendant Demarest was driving on the wrong side of the road, causing a head-on collision. Plaintiffs request punitive damages. Demarest moves to strike the request for punitive damages, as well as requests for a specific amount of damages.

Demarest argues the complaint contains no specific allegations establishing malice, fraud, or oppression. He points out that while plaintiffs make insinuations regarding defendant’s involvement in a cannabis-focused streaming platform, they do not allege Demarest was under the influence at the time of the incident. The complaint alleges he was driving on the wrong side of the road and “watching a television show” when he collided with plaintiffs’ car. Rader complaint at pg. 6. These facts, if proven, would be sufficient to show Demarest was driving with a “willful and conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others,” thereby establishing malice, whether or not he was under the influence at the time. Cal. Civ. Code §3294.

Demarest moves to strike the request for $31,050,000 and punitive damages of $20,000,00 on the grounds that under Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §425.10 a claim for personal injury may not state the amount of damages sought. Plaintiffs agree to strike the dollar amounts from their pleading.

GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.