Judge: Gregory Keosian, Case: 21STCV23782, Date: 2022-07-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV23782    Hearing Date: July 27, 2022    Dept: 61

Cross-Defendants Mi in Fashion, Inc., Tommy Lee, Young Mi Lee, Eunice Kim, and Eli Kim’s Motions to Strike Portions of the Cross-Complaint are DENIED.

I.                   MOTION TO STRIKE

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 thereof. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435(b)(1)). The notice of motion to strike a portion of a pleading shall quote in full the portions sought to be stricken except where the motion is to strike an entire paragraph, cause of action, count or defense. (California Rules of Court Rule 3.1322.)

The grounds for a motion to strike shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or form any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437(a)). The court then may strike out any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading and strike out 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. (Code Civ. Proc., § 436.) When the defect which justifies striking a complaint is capable of cure, the court should allow leave to amend. (Perlman v. Municipal Court (1979) 99 Cal.App.3d 568, 575.)

Cross-Defendants move to strike the Cross-Complaint’s prayer for attorneys’ fees under Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5, which allows for the provision of fees to a successful party “in any action which has resulted in the enforcement of an important right affecting the public interest” if certain factors are present.  (Motion at p. 11.) However, there is no requirement that a party plead its intent to seek fees under section 1021.5, and it is therefore error to strike a request for attorney’s fees under this statute in the absence of a determination, following a motion, whether the action meets the criteria set in the statute. (See Snatchko v. Westfield LLC (2010) 187 Cal.App.4th 469, 496–97 [“As there was no requirement they be pled at all, the trial court erred in striking Snatchko's prayer for attorney fees based on a failure to adequately plead their basis . . . .”].)

Accordingly, the motions to strike are DENIED.