Judge: Joel R Wohlfeil, Case: 37-2023-00024570-CU-MC-CTL, Date: 2023-12-15 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - December 14, 2023

12/15/2023  09:00:00 AM  C-73 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Joel R. Wohlfeil

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Misc Complaints - Other Demurrer / Motion to Strike 37-2023-00024570-CU-MC-CTL PICK AXE HOLDINGS LLC VS CITY OF LEMON GROVE [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Demurrer, 11/03/2023

The general Demurrer (ROA # 27) of Defendant / Respondent CITY OF LEMON GROVE ('Defendant' or 'City') to the 'Verified First Amended Complaint for Inverse Condemnation and For Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and Petition for Writ of Mandate' ('Amended Complaint') by Plaintiff / Petitioner Pick Axe Holdings, LLC ('Plaintiff'), is OVERRULED.

Defendant is ordered to file and serve its Answer within twenty (20) days of this hearing.

The City's Request (ROA # 28) for judicial notice is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

The Court takes judicial notice of the Resolutions only in Exh's 'A' and 'B,' Exh's 'C' and 'D' and the date only on which Exh. 'E' was filed with the Court; otherwise, the Request is DENIED.

Plaintiff's Request (ROA # 31) for judicial notice is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Court takes judicial notice of Exh. '2;' otherwise, the Request is DENIED.

The City's Supplemental Request (ROA # 33) for judicial notice is DENIED.

Paragraph 9 of the FAC expressly alleges that Plaintiff 'exhausted administrative remedies to the extent required by law.' Even assuming: (a) the 'no effect notification' was a separate and independent administrative decision; (b) the administrative process was not exhausted for this separate decision; and (c) this defect is disclosed on the face of the pleading (or in judicially noticed documents), this would still not support this Demurrer.

Each cause of action also alleges a claim based on the City Council's failure to grant the requested permit extension. See Sheehan v. San Francisco 49ers, Ltd. (2009) 45 Cal. 4th 992, 998 ('Moreover, we may affirm the sustaining of a demurrer only if the complaint fails to state a cause of action under any possible legal theory.').

Given the conclusion expressed above, it is not necessary for the Court to determine whether the 'no effect notification' was, in fact, a separate appealable administrative decision, or whether any potentially applicable exhaustion requirement was excused.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3047617  9