Judge: John C. Gastelum, Case: 20-01137553, Date: 2022-08-02 Tentative Ruling

Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (MJOP)

 

Tentative Ruling: Plaintiff Michael Carter’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings against Defendant Gerald L. Colella (“Defendant”) is DENIED. 

 

Before filing a motion for judgment on the pleadings, the moving party must meet and confer in person or by telephone with the party who filed the pleading that is subject to the motion to determine if an informal agreement can be reached.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 439.)  Here, no meet and confer was conducted before Plaintiff filed the instant Motion.  The Court continued this matter from June 21, 2022, to allow for meaningful meet and confer efforts.  (ROA 87.)  However, there have been no further filings showing that any meet and confer efforts were made.

 

The Court may grant a motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by a plaintiff on the grounds that the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause or causes of action against the defendant and the answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the complaint.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 438(c)(1)(A).)  The grounds for such a motion must appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the Court is required to take judicial notice.  (Id., § 438(d).)  “Where the motion is based on a matter of which the court may take judicial notice pursuant to Section 452 or 453 of the Evidence Code, the matter shall be specified in the notice of motion, or in the supporting points and authorities, except as the court may otherwise permit.”  (Ibid.)

 

Here, Plaintiff’s entire Motion is predicated on Plaintiff’s Requests for Admissions, which were deemed admitted against Defendant on April 12, 2022.  (ROA 69.)  Plaintiff requests judicial notice of these admissions by way of a “supplemental memorandum in support of motion for judgment on the pleadings” filed on April 12, 2022, but judicial notice of such matter is improper on a motion for judgment on the pleadings.  The admissions do not fall within any of the categories of matter which may be judicially noticed under Evidence Code sections 451 and 452.   (See Columbia Casualty Co. v. Northwestern Nat. Ins. Co. (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 457, 474.)  Plaintiff brought the wrong motion here – he should have filed a motion for summary judgment. 

 

Plaintiff has not submitted any other evidence in support of the Motion and has therefore failed to meet his burden as the moving party to establish he is entitled to judgment on the pleadings. 

 

Plaintiff to give notice.