Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 23STCV25127, Date: 2024-02-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV25127    Hearing Date: February 21, 2024    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

I.            INTRODUCTION

This is an auto accident case arising from an incident on November 9, 2022.  On October 13, 2023, Plaintiff Daryoush Bhaharbakshielieh (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant John Jack Tannous (“Defendant”) and Does 1 through 20, alleging one cause of action for negligence.

On January 24, 2024, Plaintiff filed a motion to strike punitive damages from the complaint.  The motion is unopposed.

II.          LEGAL STANDARD

Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (b)(1).)  The court may, upon a motion, or at any time in its discretion, and upon terms it deems proper, strike any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 436, subd. (a); Stafford v. Shultz (1954) 42 Cal.2d 767, 782 [“Matter in a pleading which is not essential to the claim is surplusage; probative facts are surplusage and may be stricken out or disregarded”].)  The court may also strike all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with California law, a court rule, or an order of the court.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 436, subd. (b).)  An immaterial or irrelevant allegation is one that is not essential to the statement of a claim or defense; is neither pertinent to nor supported by an otherwise sufficient claim or defense; or a demand for judgment requesting relief not supported by the allegations of the complaint.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 431.10, subd. (b).)  The grounds for moving to strike must appear on the face of the pleading or by way of judicial notice.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 437, subd. (a).) 

“Before filing a motion to strike . . . the moving party shall meet and confer in person or by telephone with the party who filed the pleading that is subject to the motion to strike for the purpose of determining if an agreement can be reached that resolves the objections to be raised in the motion to strike.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 435.5, subd. (a).)  If no agreement is reached, the moving party shall file and serve with the motion to strike a declaration stating either: (1) the means by which the parties met and conferred and that the parties did not reach an agreement, or (2) that the party who filed the pleading failed to respond to the meet and confer request or otherwise failed to meet and confer in good faith.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 435.5, subd. (a)(3).) 

III.        DISCUSSION

Meet and Confer

The declaration Defendant submitted in support of this motion to strike contains no evidence indicating the parties having met and conferred by telephone or in person, as is required under Code of Civil Procedure section 435.5, subdivision (a).  (See Araujo Decl., ¶3; Code Civ. Proc., § 435.5, subd. (a).)  Nevertheless, the Court may not deny a motion to strike for failure to adequately meet and confer.  (Id., § 435.5, subd. (a)(4).)  The Court will still consider the motion to strike, but admonishes Defendant to comply with the requirements of the Code of Civil Procedure going forward.

Analysis

Defendant seeks to strike certain allegations from the complaint regarding driving while intoxicated vis-à-vis Plaintiff’s request for punitive damages.  Defendant contends the complaint contains only conclusory allegations of intoxication and no facts to support those allegations.  Defendant contends there is no traffic collision report regarding the underlying accident and no allegation that Defendant was intoxicated or under the influence at the time of the accident.  The Court agrees the complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to support a claim for punitive damages based on driving while intoxicated.

“In order to state a prima facie claim for punitive damages, a complaint must set forth the elements as stated in the general punitive damage statute, Civil Code section 3294. [Citation.]  These statutory elements include allegations that the defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud or malice.”  (Turman v. Turning Point of Cent. California, Inc. (2010) 191 Cal. App. 4th 53, 63.)  Driving while intoxicated may justify an award of punitive damages.  (Taylor v. Superior Court (1979) 24 Cal.3d 890, 899-900.)

The Court finds the complaint’s allegations of Defendant driving while intoxicated to be conclusory and unsupported by any other factual allegations.  (Compl., ¶¶10-11; see Perkins v. Superior Court (1981) 117 Cal.App.3d 1, 6 [conclusions of law subject to a motion to strike if not supported by facts alleged elsewhere in the pleading].)  It is also not enough to simply allege that Defendant was intoxicated while driving.  (Dawes v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 82, 90.)

Moreover, Plaintiff did not oppose this motion, which the Court construes as a tacit admission that Defendant’s motion is meritorious.  (Holden v. City of San Diego (2019) 43 Cal.App.5th 404, 418; C. Opposing the Motion—and Rebutting the Opposition, Cal. Prac. Guide Civ. Pro. Before Trial Ch. 9(I)-C, ¶ 9:105.10.)

The Court declines to consider Defendant’s contentions regarding the traffic collision report, as that is outside the four corners of the complaint.  The Court may not consider such things on a motion to strike unless they are subject to judicial notice.  (See Code Civ. Proc., § 437, subd. (a).)

Based on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS the motion to strike.

IV.         CONCLUSION

The Court GRANTS the motion to strike with leave to amend.  Plaintiff must file and serve an amended complaint within 20 days of the Court’s order.  If Plaintiff declines to amend the complaint, Defendant must file and serve an answer to the complaint within 30 days of the Court’s order.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.

Dated this 21^st day of February 2024