Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 23STCV06122, Date: 2023-11-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV06122    Hearing Date: November 27, 2023    Dept: 53

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles – Central District

Department 53

MOVING PARTY:                Defendant Southern California Edison Company

RESPONDING PARTY:       Plaintiff David Gastelo

Motion to Strike Punitive Damages and Double and Treble Damages

The court considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers filed in connection with this motion.

DISCUSSION

Defendant Southern California Edison Company (“Defendant”) moves the court for an order striking the following from the Complaint filed in this action by plaintiff David Gastelo (“Plaintiff”): (1) paragraphs 8, 23, 24, 32, 39, 41, 47, 70, 75, 79, and 96, in their entirety, which request punitive, double, and treble damages or support those requests, and (2) the prayers for punitive, double, and treble damages, as set forth in paragraphs 3 and 14 of the prayer.

The court grants Defendant’s motion to strike (1) paragraphs 8, 24, 41, 47, 70, 75, 79, and 96, and (2) the prayer for punitive damages, as set forth in paragraph 14 of the prayer, because Plaintiff has not alleged facts establishing that Defendant or an officer, director, or managing agent of Defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 436; Civ. Code, § 3294, subd. (a).)

The court grants Defendant’s motion to strike the references to treble damages in paragraphs 23, 32, 39, and the prayer for treble damages, as set forth in paragraph 3 of the prayer, because (1) to support a claim for treble damages pursuant to Civil Code section 3346, a trespass must be willful and malicious, and (2) Plaintiff has not alleged facts establishing that Defendant’s conduct, resulting in the damage of Plaintiff’s trees and shrubbery was willful and malicious.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 436; Civ. Code, § 3346, subd. (a) [“For wrongful injuries to timber, trees, or underwood upon the land of another . . . the measure of damages is three times such sum as would compensate for the actual detriment . . . .”]; Salazar v. Matejcek (2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 634, 646 [“‘ “ ‘[T]reble damages may only be awarded when the wrongdoer intentionally acted wilfully or maliciously’ ” ’”].)

The court denies Defendant’s motion to strike the references to double damages in paragraphs 23, 32, 39, and the prayer for double damages, as set forth in paragraph 3 of the prayer, because (1) trespasses causing injuries to timber, trees, or underwood on the land of another that are “casual or involuntary” are sufficient to support an award of double damages, and Defendant has not cited to any authority showing that double damages have a similarly heightened requirement for willfulness or malice, and (2) Plaintiff has alleged a trespass upon his property that damaged trees and shrubbery.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 436; Civ. Code, § 3346, subd. (a) [“where the trespass was casual or involuntary . . . the measure of damages shall be twice the sum as would compensate for the actual detriment . . . .”]; Salazar, supra, 245 Cal.App.4th at p. 645, n. 3 [“for casual and involuntary trespass, etc., the court must impose double damages”]; Compl., ¶¶ 7, subd. (b), 35, 37, subd. (b).)

ORDER

            The court grants in part and denies in part defendant Southern California Edison Company’s motion to strike as follows.

            The court grants defendant Southern California Edison Company’s motion to strike as to (1) paragraphs 8, 24, 41, 47, 70, 75, 79, and 96, in their entirety; (2) the prayer for punitive damages, as set forth in paragraph 14 of the prayer; (3) the references to “treble damages” as set forth in paragraphs 23, 32, 39; and (4) the prayer for “treble” damages as set forth in paragraph 3 of the prayer.

            The court grants plaintiff David Gastelo 20 days leave to file a First Amended Complaint that cures the deficiencies set forth in this ruling.

            The court orders defendant Southern California Edison Company to give notice of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:  November 27, 2023

_____________________________

Robert B. Broadbelt III

Judge of the Superior Court