Judge Lee W. Tsao, Case Number: 23NWCV02172, Date: 2024-11-05 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 23NWCV02172, Date: 2024-11-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23NWCV02172 Hearing Date: November 5, 2024 Dept: C

Juvencio Macias vs Regional Acceptance Corporation, et al.

Case No.: 23NWCV02172

Hearing Date: November 5, 2024 @ 9:30 a.m.

Tentative Ruling

Defendant Regional Acceptance Corporation’s Demurrer is SUSTAINED with 20 days leave to amend.

Defendant to give notice.

Background

This is a personal injury action. As relevant here, the Complaint filed on July 13, 2023 by Plaintiff Juvencio Macias (“Plaintiff”) alleges that on or about July 6, 2022, at Orr and Day Road by Firestone Boulevard, in the City of Norwalk, “Defendant Andrew Jacob Zwirez (“Zwirez”) was operating the vehicle while under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol … and drove his vehicle into Plaintiff’s vehicle with conscious disregard for the rights and safety of others, including Plaintiff, and immediately fled from the scene … resulting in injury to a person.” (Complaint, ¶10(f).) Defendant Regional Acceptance Corporation (“RAC”) … knew of [Zwirez’s] propensities to drink and drive, knew that he was unfit to drive and yet negligently entrusted him with their vehicle.” (Ibid.) “Defendants' Regional Acceptance Corporation and Andrew Jacob Zwirez' vehicle did actually collide with Plaintiff's vehicle.” (Complaint, p. 4, ¶5.) Based thereon, Plaintiff alleges negligence and negligent supervision, hiring, retention and training against RAC; Andrew Jacob Zwirez; Lizette Lopez; Jose Romero; City of Lakewood; Lakewood Sheriff's Station; City of Norwalk; County of Los Angeles; Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department; Deputy De Medeiros; Deputy Mata; and Does 1 to 100, inclusive.

Defendant RAC demurs to the Complaint on the grounds that Plaintiff fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

Legal Standard

The party against whom a complaint has been filed may object to the pleading, by demurrer, on several grounds, including the ground that the pleading does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (CCP § 430.10(e).) A party may demur to an entire complaint, or to any causes of action stated therein. (CCP § 430.50(a).)

Discussion

Under California law, to state a claim for negligence, plaintiff must plead the following required elements: “(1) a duty to use reasonable care; (2) breach of that duty; (3) proximate [or actual/legal] cause; and (4) plaintiff’s injury.” (Mendoza v. City of L.A., (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1333, 1339.)

RAC contends, among other things, that the Complaint does not allege RAC had ownership or title to Swirez’s vehicle, nor does it allege RAC had possessed, controlled or operated Swirez’s vehicle at the time of the subject incident.

Plaintiff argues that RAC is listed as the owner of the vehicle in the Traffic Collision Report, and therefore the allegations in the Complaint are proper. However, Complaint does not refer to the Traffic Collision Report and the report is not included as an attachment. As to ownership of the vehicle, the Complaint merely alleges “Defendants' Regional Acceptance Corporation and Andrew Jacob Zwirez' vehicle did actually collide with Plaintiff's vehicle.” (Complaint, pg. 4, ¶5.) The Court determines that the Complaint does not sufficiently plead RAC’s connection to Swirez, RAC’s ownership interest in the vehicle driven by Zwirez, or any duty RAC owes to Plaintiff.

Accordingly, the demurrer is SUSTAINED with 20 days leave to amend.