Judge: Michael Small, Case: 24STCV22198, Date: 2025-02-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV22198    Hearing Date: February 24, 2025    Dept: 57

The Defendants' demurrer is overruled as to the Plaintiff's claims in her First Amended Complaint ("FAC") for breach of a written contract and breach of oral contracts.  In the Court's view, the allegations in the FAC are sufficient to support both of those claims.   The claims do not fail for lack of certainty.  Nor are they barred by the applicable statute of limitations. And the Court disagrees with Defendants that the sham pleading doctrine applies to, and knocks out, the claim for breach of a written contract.

The Defendant's demurrer is sustained with leave to amend as to the claims in the FAC for fraudulent promise and theft under Penal Code Section 496(a).  The allegations in the FAC are insufficient to support those two claims.

The Defendants' motion to strike allegations related to the fraud and theft claims in the FAC is denied as moot in light of the Court's decision to sustain the demurrer with leave to amend as to those claims.