Judge: Marcella O. Mclaughlin, Case: 37-2023-00027622-CU-WT-CTL, Date: 2023-12-08 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - December 07, 2023

12/08/2023  01:30:00 PM  C-72 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Marcella O McLaughlin

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Wrongful Termination Demurrer / Motion to Strike 37-2023-00027622-CU-WT-CTL ALVAREZ VS MRS GOOCHS NATURAL FOOD MARKETS INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion to Strike, 08/29/2023

The motion to strike portions of the complaint is GRANTED with leave to amend.

In order to state a prima facie claim for punitive damages, a complaint must 'include specific factual allegations showing that defendant's conduct was oppressive, fraudulent, or malicious[.]' Today's IV, Inc. v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (2022) 83 Cal.App.5th 1137, 1193. In addition, a corporation will only be liable for punitive damages based on acts ratified, authorized, or committed by a corporate officer, director, or managing agent. Civ. Code § 3294(b).

In this case, insufficient facts have been pled to establish oppression, fraud, or malice within the meaning of Civil Code section 3294(a). Plaintiff has not alleged intentional misrepresentation or concealment for purposes of 'fraud.' As for 'oppression' and the second prong of 'malice,' the facts pled do not show 'despicable conduct' – i.e., conduct that is 'so vile, base, or contemptible that it would be looked down on and despised by reasonable people.' CACI 3940. Finally, there are no facts showing an intent to injure plaintiff, as required for the first prong of 'malice.' See Turman v. Turning Point of Central California, Inc. (2010) 191 Cal.App.4th 53, 63-64 (holding that complaint failed to state facts to support a request for punitive damages despite having sufficiently alleged a claim for gender discrimination); see also Scott v. Phoenix Schools, Inc. (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 702, 717 ('[W]rongful termination, without more, will not sustain a finding of malice or oppression.').

Moreover, even if plaintiff had stated a prima face claim for punitive damages, plaintiff has failed to plead facts showing that an officer, director, or managing agent of defendant authorized, ratified, or personally committed the alleged wrongful conduct. Civ. Code § 3294(b). A managing agent is 'someone who exercises substantial discretionary authority over decisions that ultimately determine corporate policy.' White v. Ultramar, Inc. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 563, 753. The 'mere ability to hire and fire employees' does not render a supervisory employee a 'managing agent.' Id. at 566.

Plaintiff must file and serve a first amended complaint by December 18, 2023. See Angie M. v. Superior Court (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1217, 1227 ('Liberality in permitting amendment is the rule, if a fair opportunity to correct any defect has not been given.').

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3037977  37