Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 22STCV09200, Date: 2023-08-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV09200    Hearing Date: August 18, 2023    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: August 18, 2023

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion to Strike

Moving Party: Defendants 4437-39 Vista Del Monte Avenue L.P. and Mellanie Cook

Responding Party: Plaintiff Kris Cook

T/R:      DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE IS DENIED.

DEFENDANTS TO NOTICE.

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at SMCdept54@lacourt.org with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing.

The Court considers the moving papers, opposition, and reply.

“Any party, within the time allowed to response to a pleading, may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part" of that pleading. (CCP § 435(b)(1).) “The Court may, upon a motion made pursuant to Section 435, or at any time in its discretion, and upon terms it deems proper: (a) Strike out any irrelevant, false or improper matter asserted in any pleading; (b) Strike out all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of this state, a court rule, or an order of the Court." (CCP § 436.)

Punitive damages are available in noncontract cases where the defendant is guilty of “oppression, fraud, or malice.”  (Civil Code § 3294(a).)  Conclusory allegations are insufficient to support a claim for punitive damages.  (See, e.g., Fisher v. San Pedro Peninsula Hospital (1989) 214 Cal. App. 3d 590, 620.)  However, “the stricken language must be read not in isolation, but in the context of the facts alleged in the rest of petitioner's complaint.”  (Perkins v. Superior Court (1981) 117 Cal. App. 3d 1, 6.)

Defendants move to strike Plaintiff’s prayer for punitive damages.

This action arises from a family-owned limited partnership. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Mellanie Cook, Plaintiff’s sister, breached her fiduciary duties to Plaintiff by withholding documents and communications such as financial statements, failing to account for all income, taking unreasonably high management fees, and failing to disburse Plaintiff’s full share of the profits. Plaintiff also alleges that Mellanie Cook wrongfully persuaded their father to sign a will which cut out Plaintiff.

Defendants assert Plaintiff has failed to allege oppression, fraud, or malice with the requisite specificity. The Court previously granted Defendants’ motion to strike punitive damages from the first amended complaint, finding that conclusory allegations -- like Mellanie “fraudulently and coercively” persuaded their father to sign a will -- are insufficient to support punitive damages. Plaintiff has added factual allegations to the second amended complaint, including allegations that Mellanie’s signature is substantially similar to their father’s purported signature on his will; this suggests fraud, coercion and/or forgery. Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged oppression, fraud, or malice.

Defendants’ motion to strike is DENIED.