Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 22STCV21589, Date: 2023-11-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV21589    Hearing Date: November 20, 2023    Dept: 28

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. 

BACKGROUND

On July 5, 2022, Plaintiff Jennifer Santoro (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Ben Goldman, individually and as trustee for the Goldman Trust, Dorothy Goldman, individually and as trustee for the Goldman Trust, Midas Development Company, LLC ("Midas"), City of Los Angeles (“City”), and Does 1-50 for general negligence and premises liability. The case was initially set for trial on January 2, 2024.

On August 9, 2022, the City filed an answer.

On August 11, 2022, Defendants Ben Goldman and Dorothy Goldman, individually and as trustees for the Goldman Revocable Trust, erroneously sued and served as the Goldman Trust, filed an answer.

          On November 3, 2022, the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion to be relieved from the Government Code section 945.4 claim filing requirement or, in the alternative, for an order that Plaintiff substantially complied with the requirement.

          On November 9, 2022, the Court dismissed Midas without prejudice at Plaintiff’s request.

On September 6, 2023, the City filed a motion to dismiss the complaint under Code of Civil Procedure section 581, subdivision (m), to be heard on November 20, 2023.  Plaintiff has not filed an opposition.

Trial is currently scheduled for October 29, 2024.

PARTY’S REQUEST

The City requests that the Court dismiss Plaintiff’s action against the City.

LEGAL STANDARD

Code of Civil Procedure section 581, subdivision (m), provides: “The provisions of this section shall not be deemed to be an exclusive enumeration of the court’s power to dismiss an action or dismiss a complaint as to a defendant.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 581, subd. (m).)

Code of Civil Procedure section  438 provides in part:

“(b) (1) A party may move for judgment on the pleadings.

“(2) The court may upon its own motion grant a motion for judgment on the pleadings.

“(c) (1) The motion provided for in this section may only be made on one of the following grounds:

* * *

“(B) If the moving party is a defendant, that either of the following conditions exist:

“(i) The court has no jurisdiction of the subject of the cause of action alleged in the complaint.

“(ii) The complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against that defendant.

“(2) The motion provided for in this section may be made as to either of the following:

“(A) The entire complaint or cross-complaint or as to any of the causes of action stated therein.

* * *

“(3) If the court on its own motion grants the motion for judgment on the pleadings, it shall be on one of the following bases:

* * *

“(B) If the motion is granted in favor of the defendant, that either of the following conditions exist:

“(i) The court has no jurisdiction of the subject of the cause of action alleged in the complaint.

“(ii) The complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against that defendant.

“(d) The grounds for motion provided for in this section shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice. Where the motion is based on a matter of which the court may take judicial notice pursuant to Section 452 or 453 of the Evidence Code, the matter shall be specified in the notice of motion, or in the supporting points and authorities, except as the court may otherwise permit.

* * *

“(f) The motion provided for in this section may be made only after one of the following conditions has occurred:

* * *

“(2) If the moving party is a defendant, and the defendant has already filed his or her answer to the complaint and the time for the defendant to demur to the complaint has expired.

* * *

“(h) (1) The motion provided for in this section may be granted with or without leave to file an amended complaint or answer, as the case may be.

                                        * * *

“(2) All motions made pursuant to this subdivision shall be made pursuant to Section 1010. 

“(3) At the hearing on the motion provided for in this subdivision, the court shall determine whether to enter judgment in favor of a particular party.”

(Code Civ. Proc., § 483, subds. (b), (c), (d), (f), (h).)       

DISCUSSION

The City requests that the Court dismiss the action against the City because Plaintiff has failed to comply with or be relieved from the requirements of the Government Claims Act.

The Court construes the City’s motion as a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Code of Civil Procedure section 438 and grants the motion.  On November 3, 2022, the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion to be relieved from the Government Code section 945.4 claim filing requirement or, in the alternative, for an order that Plaintiff substantially complied with the requirement.  Plaintiff has not appealed this ruling.  Therefore, Plaintiff cannot state a claim for relief against the City.

CONCLUSION

The Court construes the City of Los Angeles’s motion to dismiss the claims of Plaintiff Jennifer Santoro as a motion for judgment on the pleadings and GRANTS the motion without leave to amend.

Moving party is to submit a proposed judgment for the Court’s signature.

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Moving party is ordered to file proof of service of this ruling within five days.