Judge: Mel Red Recana, Case: 23STCV07535, Date: 2024-05-21 Tentative Ruling

All rulings shown here are TENTATIVE ONLY, and thus oral argument WILL be heard. All Counsel are still required to attend.

Case Number: 23STCV07535    Hearing Date: May 21, 2024    Dept: 45

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Hearing date:  May 21, 2024

Moving Parties:  Defendants State Farm General Insurance and Aaron Vuong

Responding Party:  None

Demurrer to Complaint

The court CONTINUES the hearing for Defendants’ demurrer to ­­­­­­­­__________, at 8:30 a.m., in Department 45 to provide Defendants an opportunity to comply with the meet-and-confer requirements of CCP § 430.41. The court orders Defendants to file a meet-and-confer declaration that complies with the requirements of CCP § 430.41 no later than seven court days prior to the continued hearing date.

Discussion

On July 14, 2023, defendants State Farm General Insurance Company and Aaron Vuong (collectively, “Defendants”) filed a demurrer to the Complaint, filed by plaintiffs Hew Quon, M.D., Wanda Quon, D.O., David Quon, M.D., Mathew Quon-Chow, and Victoria Quon-Chow (collectively, “Plaintiffs”). 

CCP § 430.41(a) states, in relevant part: “Before filing a demurrer . . . the demurring party shall meet and confer in person or by telephone with the party who filed the pleading that is subject to demurrer for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objections to be raised in the demurrer.” 

CCP § 430.41(a)(2) states, in relevant part: “The parties shall meet and confer at least five days before the date the responsive pleading is due. If the parties are not able to meet and confer at least five days prior to the date the responsive pleading is due, the demurring party shall be granted an automatic 30-day extension of time within which to file a responsive pleading, by filing and serving, on or before the date on which a demurrer would be due, a declaration stating under penalty of perjury that a good faith attempt to meet and confer was made and explaining the reasons why the parties could not meet and confer.” 

CCP § 430.41(a)(3) provides: “The demurring party shall file and serve with the demurrer a declaration stating either of the following: (A) The means by which the demurring party met and conferred with the party who filed the pleading subject to demurrer, and that the parties did not reach an agreement resolving the objections raised in the demurrer. (B) That the party who filed the pleading subject to demurrer failed to respond to the meet and confer request of the demurring party or otherwise failed to meet and confer in good faith.”

The court finds Defendants fail to establish that they complied with the meet-and-confer requirements under CCP § 430.41. Defendants’ counsel’s declaration does not establish that the parties met and conferred in person or by telephone as required under CCP § 430.41(a).

The court therefore CONTINUES the hearing for Defendants’ demurrer to the date and time set forth above in Department 45 to provide Defendants an opportunity to comply with the meet-and-confer requirements of CCP § 430.41. The court orders Defendants to file meet-and-confer declarations that comply with the requirements of CCP § 430.41 no later than seven court days prior to the continued hearing date. 

It is so ordered. 

Dated: May 21, 2024

_______________________

MEL RED RECANA

Judge of the Superior Court