Judge: Kevin C. Brazile, Case: 23STCV04331, Date: 2023-04-19 Tentative Ruling

Hearing Date: April 19, 2023

Case Name: Mayer Beverly Park, LP v. Platokhina, et al.

Case No.: 23STCV02241 

Matter: Demurrer; Motion to Strike

Moving Party: Defendant Iuliia Platokhina Wright 

Responding Party: Unopposed

Notice: OK

Ruling: The Demurrer is sustained.  Leave to amend is to be argued.

The Motion to Strike is granted.

Moving party to give notice.

If counsel do not submit on the tentative, they are strongly 

encouraged to appear by LACourtConnect rather than in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

This is an unlawful detainer action for failure to pay rent.

Defendant Iuliia Platokhina Wright brings a Demurrer and Motion to Strike as to the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”).

When considering demurrers, courts read the allegations liberally and in context, and “treat the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law.” (Serrano v. Priest (1971) 5 Cal.3d 584, 591.)  “A demurrer tests the pleadings alone and not the evidence or other extrinsic matters. Therefore, it lies only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed. The only issue involved in a demurrer hearing is whether the complaint, as it stands, unconnected with extraneous matters, states a cause of action.”  (Hahn v. Mirda¿(2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 740, 747.)  It is error “to sustain a demurrer without leave to amend if the plaintiff shows there is a reasonable possibility any defect identified by the defendant can be cured by amendment.”  (Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital Dist.¿(1992) 2 Cal.4th 962, 967.)

Motions to strike are used to challenge defects in the pleadings not subject to demurrer.  Any party may move to strike the whole or any part of a pleading within the time allotted to respond to the pleading.  (Code Civ. Proc. § 435(b)(1).)  The grounds for a motion to strike shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the Court is required to take judicial notice.  (Id. § 437(a).)  The Court 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.  (Id. § 436.)  An “irrelevant” matter includes any “demand for judgment requesting relief not supported by the allegations of the complaint or cross-complaint.”  (Id. § 431.10(b)(3), (c); see also Smith v. Superior Court (1992) 10 Cal.App.4th 1033, 1036-1042.)

The Motion to Strike is granted because the FAC is not verified in violation of Code Civ. Proc. § 1166.

Further, there is no opposition to the argument that the FAC was filed in violation of the LA City/County eviction moratorium.  Therefore, this argument is conceded.  (See DuPont Merck Pharmaceutical Co. v. Superior Court (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 562, 566.)  The Demurrer is sustained.  Leave to amend is to be argued.   

Moving party to give notice.

If counsel do not submit on the tentative, they are strongly encouraged to appear by LACourtConnect rather than in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic.