Judge: Peter A. Hernandez, Case: 22STCV30653, Date: 2023-10-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV30653    Hearing Date: October 9, 2023    Dept: K

Defendant C&H Rental Properties LLC’s Demurrer to Plaintiff’s Complaint is SUSTAINED. The court will hear from counsel for Plaintiff as to whether leave to amend is requested and will require an offer of proof if so.

Background[1]  

Plaintiff Tabitha Daugherty (“Plaintiff”) alleges as follows:

C&H Rental Properties LLC (“Defendant”) owns the residential property located at 1516 Cordova Street, Pomona, CA 91767 (“Premises”); Plaintiff was a tenant. On September 23, 2020, Plaintiff’s foot became caught in the buckled and loose carpet on the stairs at the Premises, which caused her to trip and fall and sustain injuries.

On September 20, 2022, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Defendant and Does 1-25 for:

1.                  Negligence (Premises Liability)

2.                  Breach of the Implied Warranty of Habitability

On June 7, 2023, this case was reassigned from Department 31 of the Personal Injury Court to this instant department.

A Status Conference is set for October 9, 2023.

Legal Standard

A demurrer may be made on the grounds that the pleading, inter alia, does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).)

When considering demurrers, courts read the allegations liberally and in context. In a demurrer proceeding, the defects must be apparent on the face of the pleading or via proper judicial notice. (Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994.) “A demurrer tests the pleadings alone and not the evidence or other extrinsic matters. Therefore, it lies only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed.” (SKF Farms v. Superior Court (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 902, 905 [citations omitted].) At the pleading stage, a plaintiff need only allege ultimate facts sufficient to apprise the defendant of the factual basis for the claim against him. (Semole v. Sansoucie (1972) 28 Cal. App. 3d 714, 721.) “[A] demurrer does not, however, admit contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law alleged in the pleading, or the construction placed on an instrument pleaded therein, or facts impossible in law, or allegations contrary to facts of which a court may take judicial knowledge.” (S. Shore Land Co. v. Petersen (1964) 226 Cal.App.2d 725, 732 [citations omitted].)

Discussion

Defendant demurs, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 430.10, subdivision (e), to the second cause of action in Plaintiff’s complaint (i.e., for Breach of the Implied Warranty of Habitability), on the basis that it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

The elements of a cause of action for breach of the implied warranty of habitability “are the existence of a material defective condition affecting the premises' habitability, notice to the landlord of the condition within a reasonable time after the tenant's discovery of the condition, the landlord was given a reasonable time to correct the deficiency, and resulting damages.” (Erlach v. Sierra Asset Servicing, LLC (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1281, 1297.)

Plaintiff has alleged that on September 23, 2020, she was walking down the stairs in the Rental Property, that she tripped and fell when her foot was caught in the buckled and loose carpet on the stairs and that she sustained severe injuries. (Complaint, ¶¶ 9 and 10). Plaintiff, however, has not pled that Defendant was given “notice. . . of the condition within a reasonable time after the tenant's discovery of the condition” and/or that “the landlord was given a reasonable time to correct the deficiency.”

Defendant’s demurrer is sustained.