Judge Lee W. Tsao, Case 22NWCV00413 2023-03-07 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 22NWCV00413, Date: 2023-03-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22NWCV00413 Hearing Date: March 7, 2023 Dept: C

SANDOVAL v. SANDOVAL, et al.

CASE NO.: 22NWCV00413

HEARING: 3/7/23 @ 1:30 PM

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Maria Sandoval’s demurrer to the verified first amended answer of Gloria Sandoval is OVERRULED.

Opposing Party to give NOTICE.

Plaintiff Maria Sandoval demurs to the Defendant Gloria Sandoval’s 2^nd – 6^th, 12^th - 13^th, 15^th – 19^th affirmative defenses on the grounds that they fail to state facts sufficient to constitute an affirmative defense.

FAILURE TO STATE FACTS SUFFICIENT

Under CCP § 430.20, a party against whom an answer has been filed may demur to the answer when it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense or when it is uncertain. (CCP § 430.20(a).) California law requires an answer to plead facts with as much detail was are required for a cause of action. (See FPI Development, Inc. v. Nakashima (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 367, 384.) However, some vagueness may exist in a defendant’s answer because most defendants do not have the ability to prove their defenses at the initial answering phase, which usually occurs before discovery. Additionally, a defendant has a significant incentive to plead every affirmative defense because a party waives defenses that are not pled. As a result, even where a defense is defectively pled, it may be allowed if the defendant’s pleading gives sufficient notice to enable the plaintiff to prepare to meet the defense, in part because unpled defenses are waived. (See Harris v. City of Santa Monica (2013) 56 Cal.4th 203, 240.) Furthermore, it is settled law in California that a defendant may plead as many inconsistent defenses in an answer as he or she may desire and that such defenses may not be considered as admissions against interest in the action in which the answer was filed. (Id. at 240-41.)

The court finds that the affirmative defenses are adequately pled, and gives notice to Plaintiff of the defenses asserted. ¶¶ 40-60 factually support the defenses. If Plaintiff is confused about the exact nature of the defense, Plaintiff may conduct discovery to ascertain additional facts supporting each defense.

Accordingly, the demurrer is OVERRULED.