Judge: Joseph Lipner, Case: 24STCV26742, Date: 2025-02-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV26742    Hearing Date: February 6, 2025    Dept: 72

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

DEPARTMENT 72

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (sued as “Bank of America”) (“Defendant”) demurs to the Complaint filed by Plaintiff Shirley Coleman (“Plaintiff”).

The Court SUSTAINS the demurrer with leave to amend. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint within 20 days.

Background

            Plaintiff filed this action against Defendant on October 14, 2024.  Defendant filed a demurrer on December 11, 2024.  Plaintiff has not filed an opposition.

Legal Standard

“The party against whom a complaint or cross-complaint has been filed may object, by demurrer or answer as provided in Section 430.30, to the pleading on any one or more of the following grounds:

(a) The court has no jurisdiction of the subject of the cause of action alleged in the pleading.

(b) The person who filed the pleading does not have the legal capacity to sue.

(c) There is another action pending between the same parties on the same cause of action.

(d) There is a defect or misjoinder of parties.

(e) The pleading does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

(f) The pleading is uncertain. As used in this subdivision, “uncertain” includes ambiguous and unintelligible.

(g) In an action founded upon a contract, it cannot be ascertained from the pleading whether the contract is written, is oral, or is implied by conduct.

(h) No certificate was filed as required by Section 411.35.”

(Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10.)

As a general matter, in a demurrer proceeding, the defects must be apparent on the face of the pleading or via proper judicial notice. (Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994.) “A demurrer tests the pleading alone, and not the evidence or facts alleged.” (E-Fab, Inc. v. Accountants, Inc. Servs. (2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 1308, 1315.) The court assumes the truth of the complaint’s properly pleaded or implied factual allegations. (Ibid.) The only issue a demurrer is concerned with is whether the complaint, as it stands, states a cause of action. (Hahn v. Mirda (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 740, 747.)

Where a demurrer is sustained, leave to amend must be allowed where there is a reasonable possibility of successful amendment. (Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 348.) The burden is on the plaintiff to show the court that a pleading can be amended successfully. (Ibid.; Lewis v. YouTube, LLC (2015) 244 Cal.App.4th 118, 226.) However, “[i]f there is any reasonable possibility that the plaintiff can state a good cause of action, it is error to sustain a demurrer without leave to amend.” (Youngman v. Nevada Irrigation Dist. (1969) 70 Cal.2d 240, 245).

Discussion

The Complaint does not identify a cause of action being raised. In the section of the form complaint for designating a cause of action, Plaintiff indicates that Defendant refused to release her funds.

Plaintiff alleges that she also has a bank account at Wells Fargo. Plaintiff alleges that Wells Fargo transferred one hundred and forty million dollars to her bank account with Defendant. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant has not allowed her to access her funds. Plaintiff alleges that the “CEO of [t]his [b]ranch” has falsely promised to release her funds and has been arrested by the police three times for lying about releasing the funds. Plaintiff alleges that the CEO has stated that it makes him physically sick when he tries to release funds to Plaintiff’s account.

The allegations of the complaint do not currently describe any clear set of facts to which Defendant can respond.  It is not clear what cause of action Plaintiff is raising. It is also unclear what damages Plaintiff seeks, as she did not fill out section 10 of the form complaint, which would ordinarily state the relief that Plaintiff demands.

The Court sustains the demurrer with leave to amend.