Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 24STLC00035, Date: 2024-03-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STLC00035    Hearing Date: March 28, 2024    Dept: 26

Adeosun v. Queen, et al.

DEMURRER

(CCP § 430.10, et seq.)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant Queen Anieze-Smith’s Demurrer to the Complaint is OVERRULED. DEFENDANT IS TO FILE AND SERVE AN ANSWER TO THE COMPLAINT WITHIN 20 DAYS OF THIS ORDER.

ANALYSIS:

On January 4, 2024, Plaintiff Oluwakemi Adeosun (“Plaintiff”), in propria persona, filed the Complaint in this action against Defendant Queen Anieze-Smith (“Defendant”) (erroneously sued as Anieze Smith Queen). Defendant, in propria persona, filed the instant Demurrer to the Complaint on February 20, 2024. No opposition has been filed to date.

Discussion

Plaintiff alleges she met Defendant through church and Defendant introduced herself as a car dealer. (Compl., p. 2.) Plaintiff stated she needed a reliable car and Defendant promised to get Plaintiff a good vehicle. (Ibid.) Plaintiff paid Defendant $9,750.00 for a 2015 Honda CR-V only to discover that it needed repairs in the thousands of dollars, which Plaintiff also paid. (Ibid.) Defendant also promised to do the registration for $500.00 but then refused to communicate and threatened to call the police and report the vehicle as stolen. (Ibid.) Plaintiff returned the vehicle so she would not get in trouble and asked for her money back. (Ibid.)

Defendant demurs to the Complaint for failure to allege facts sufficient to state a cause of action. (Citing Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (d).) However, the Demurrer is not accompanied by a meet and confer declaration as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41. (Motion, Jensen Decl., ¶¶2-3.) The Demurrer is brought on the grounds that Defendant was not a party to the vehicle purchase agreement, which was between Plaintiff and Bewise Auto Sales. As this argument relies on facts outside of the Complaint or of judicially noticeable matters, it is not a proper basis to demur. A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack; or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.30; Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.)

Therefore, the Demurrer to the Complaint is overruled.

Conclusion

Defendant Queen Anieze-Smith’s Demurrer to the Complaint is OVERRULED. DEFENDANT IS TO FILE AND SERVE AN ANSWER TO THE COMPLAINT WITHIN 20 DAYS OF THIS ORDER.

Court clerk to give notice.