Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 22STCV13457, Date: 2022-10-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV13457    Hearing Date: October 5, 2022    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

            One Day Defendants’ demurrer is OVERRULED.

            On 4/21/2022, Plaintiff CBD Franchising, Inc. filed suit against Central Jersey Doors & Closets, LLC, Mary Conway, William Conway, One Day Doors and Closets, Inc., and One Day Enterprises, alleging: (1) breach of written contract; (2) breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing; (3) tortious interference with contractual relations; and (4) unlawful business practices.

            Now, One Day Doors and Closets, Inc., and One Day Enterprises (collectively, One Day Defendants) demur to the third and fourth causes of action.

Discussion

            One Day Defendants argue that Plaintiffs third and fourth cause of action fail because they are predicated upon a non-binding contract that is unenforceable under California law.

More specifically, One Day Defendants argue that: (1) the 2013 was franchise agreement was not accepted in the manner specified within the agreement itself; (2) as such it is unenforceable; (3) Plaintiff released the Conways from all of their rights, duties, and obligations under the 2013 franchise agreement; (4) the post-term non-compete provision violates California’s public policy in favor of free competition; and (5)  Plaintiff’s arguments to the contrary are unpersuasive.

However, the Court accepts well-pled allegations as true at the pleading stage. (Popescu v. Apple, Inc. (2016) 1 Cal.App.5th 39,46.)  Here, One Day Defendant are asking the Court to disregard Plaintiff’s allegations to the contrary and adjudicate on the merits the issue of whether or not the 2013 franchise agreement is enforceable. Such determinations are not properly made at the pleading stage, and as noted by Plaintiff in opposition, “ODD’s arguments for demurrer are primarily fact-based and stray far outside the four corners of the Complaint as plead.” (Opp., 7:25-26.)

            Based on the foregoing, Defendants’ demurrer is overruled.

It is so ordered.

Dated:             , 2022

   Hon. Jon R. Takasugi
   Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.  If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. 

            Due to Covid-19, the court is strongly discouraging in-person appearances.  Parties, counsel, and court reporters present are subject to temperature checks and health inquiries, and will be denied entry if admission could create a public health risk.  The court encourages the parties wishing to argue to appear via L.A. Court Connect.  For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.  Your understanding during these difficult times is appreciated.