Judge: Peter A. Hernandez, Case: 22PSCV00714, Date: 2022-09-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22PSCV00714    Hearing Date: September 7, 2022    Dept: O

Plaintiff Safe Fire, Inc.’s unopposed Motion to Strike Defendant’s Answer is GRANTED.

Background     

This is an unlawful detainer action involving the property located at 5354 Irwindale Ave., Building B, Irwindale, CA 91706 (“subject property”).

On July 14, 2022, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting a cause of action against VX Group, Inc. (“Defendant”) and Does 1-10 for: 

1.               Unlawful Detainer 

A Case Management Conference is set for November 7, 2022.

Legal Standard 

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 436, “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 inserted 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.” The grounds for a motion to strike must “appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 437.) 

Discussion 

Plaintiff moves the court for an order striking Defendant’s answer in its entirety on the basis that Defendant is a corporation and must be represented by counsel.

“The rule is clear in this state that, with the sole exception of small claims court, a corporation cannot act in propria persona in a California state court.” (Thomas G. Ferruzzo, Inc. v. Superior Court (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 501, 503; Vann v. Shilleh (1975) 54 Cal.App.3d 192, 199 [“A corporation cannot represent itself in court, either in propria persona or through an officer or agent who is not an attorney”].) 

Here, Defendant’s answer was not filed by an attorney, but instead filed by Defendant “in pro per” and signed by Defendant’s Chief Financial Officer, Ven Xu.

The unopposed motion is granted.