Judge Lee W. Tsao, Case Number: 23NWCV02798, Date: 2024-04-09 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 23NWCV02798, Date: 2024-04-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23NWCV02798 Hearing Date: April 9, 2024 Dept: C

Fernando Ortiz Baeza, et al. vs West Wind Logistics Inc, et al.

Case No.: 23NWCV02798

Hearing Date: April 9, 2024 @ 9:30 AM

Tentative Ruling

Defendant West Wind Logistics Inc.’s Motion to Strike is GRANTED with 20 days to amend.

Defendant to give notice.

Defendant West Wind Logistics, Inc. moves to strike all language in the Complaint relating to punitive damages on the grounds that the allegations are conclusory and lack specificity.

Background

This personal injury lawsuit arises out of a motor vehicle accident which occurred on June 1, 2022. The Complaint alleges that Plaintiff Fernando Ortiz Baeza (Plaintiff Baeza”) was injured by Defendant Ricardo Padilla Zamora who was operating a commercial vehicle without a Class A license. The Complaint alleges that Defendant West Wind Logistics, Inc. (“Defendant West Wind Logistics”) owned the vehicle driven by Zamora and knew or should have known that Zamora did not possess a Class A license.

Defendant West Wind Logistics moves to strike the following language from the Complaint: “Driving such a dangerous Vehicle as a Freightliner without driver means putting everyone life at risk as such the act the Defendants is oppressive, malicious, deliberate, willful, and with conscious disregard of the right of Plaintiffs and the society In general. As a results, Plaintiffs seek punitive damages against Defendants In order to deter such conduct in the future." (Complaint, Second Cause of Action, pg. 5.) Defendant West Wind Logistics also moves to strike the prayer for punitive damages.

Legal Standard

Upon motion, or at any time in its own discretion, a court may grant a motion to strike any of the following material: (1) irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading; or (2) all or any part of any pleading not drawn in conformity with the laws of this state, a court rule, or an order of the court. (Code Civ. Proc. §436.) These provisions also authorize “the striking of a pleading due to improprieties in its form or in the procedures pursuant to which it was filed.” (Ferraro v. Camarlinghi, (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 509, 528, emphasis in original.)

A request for punitive damages may be made pursuant to Civil Code § 3294(a) which provides that “[i]n an action for the breach of an obligation not arising from contract, where it is proven by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice, the plaintiff, in addition to the actual damages, may recover damages for the sake of example and by way of punishing the defendant.” “In order to survive a motion to strike an allegation of punitive damages, the ultimate facts showing an entitlement to such relief must be pled by a plaintiff.” (Clauson v. Sup. Ct..(1998) 67 Cal. App. 4th 1253, 1255.)

Discussion

Plaintiff alleges that Zamora’s license had been revoked “because of drunk driving” and that Defendant West Wind Logistics knew or should have known that Zamora drove without a Class A license. (Complaint, p. 5.) Plaintiff does not allege that Zamora was under the influence at the time of the incident, nor does Plaintiff allege that Defendant West Wind Logistics intended to cause harm to Plaintiff. Without additional factual support, the Complaint fails to adequately allege a claim for punitive damages.

Defendant West Wind Logistic’s Motion to Stike is GRANTED with 20 days to amend.