Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 22STLC03991, Date: 2022-12-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STLC03991    Hearing Date: December 20, 2022    Dept: 26


 Vuong v. Chinh, et al.

MOTION TO STRIKE PUNITIVE DAMAGES

(CCP §§ 435, 436)

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

Defendant Mui Nam Chinh’s Motion to Strike Punitive Damages is GRANTED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.

 

 

ANALYSIS:

 

On June 15, 2022, Plaintiff Diane Vuong (“Plaintiff”) filed this action for motor vehicle negligence and general negligence against Defendant Mui Nam Chinh (“Defendant”). Defendant filed the instant Motion to Strike Punitive Damages on August 15, 2022. No opposition has been filed to date.

 

 

Discussion

 

Defendant brings the instant Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s request for punitive damages pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 436. The Motion is accompanied by a meet and confer declaration as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 435.5. (Motion, Palmer Decl., ¶¶3-4.) Defendant moves to strike the allegations and prayer for punitive damages on the grounds that they do not meet the statutory requirements.

 

The Complaint alleges that the motor vehicle accident “occurred in the Number 2 lane, north bound Garvey Avenue, approaching Muscatel Avenue in Vacinity [sic] of 8811 Garvey Avenue Rosemead CA 91770.” (Compl., ¶MV-1.) The accident was allegedly caused by Defendant maneuvering her vehicle in a negligent manner and failing to yield the right of way to Plaintiff. (Id. ¶GN-1.)

 

Punitive damages are authorized by Civil Code section 3294 in non-contract cases “where the defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice, express or implied . . . .”  (Civil Code, § 3294, subd. (a).) Malice means conduct which is intended by the defendant to cause injury to the plaintiff or despicable conduct which is carried on by the defendant with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others. (Civil Code, § 3294, subd. (c)(1).) Oppression means despicable conduct that subjects a person to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of that person’s rights. (Civil Code, § 3294, subd. (c)(2).) Fraud means an intentional misrepresentation, deceit, or concealment of a material fact known to the defendant with the intention on the party of the defendant of thereby depriving a person of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury. (Civil Code, § 3294, subd. (c)(3).) Finally, punitive damages sought against a corporation must additionally allege that the corporation’s corporate officer, director, or managing agent acted with the aforementioned malice, oppression or fraud. (White v. Ultramar (1999) 21 Cal.4th 563, 569.)

 

The Complaint does not allege any facts reflecting that Defendant’s conduct was oppressive, fraudulent, or malicious. To the contrary, the Complaint only alleges that Defendant’s conduct was due to a lack of reasonable care. Nor are any facts alleged regarding Defendant’s state of mind. Therefore, Plaintiff has not alleged facts to support a request for punitive damages. Finally, in failing to file an opposition, Plaintiff has not shown that additional facts can be added to the Complaint to sufficiently allege a lawful basis for punitive damages, as is the complainant’s burden. (See Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 348.)

 

Conclusion

 

Defendant Mui Nam Chinh’s Motion to Strike Punitive Damages is GRANTED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.

 

 

Moving party to give notice.