Judge Salvatore Sirna, Case Number: 24PSCV02046, Date: 2024-10-09 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 24PSCV02046, Date: 2024-10-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24PSCV02046 Hearing Date: October 9, 2024 Dept: G

Defendant Faviola Ponce’s Demurrer

Respondent: Plaintiff Marco Ponce, Sr.

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Faviola Ponce’s Demurrer is CONTINUED to a date to be determined at the hearing in Department G (Pomona).

Defendant’s counsel is also ordered to meet and confer with Plaintiffs’ counsel regarding the Demurrer and to file a supplemental declaration describing such meet and confer efforts, including whether the attempts were made by telephone, video conference, or in person, at least (9) court days before the next scheduled hearing on the Demurrer.

BACKGROUND

This is an action for elder abuse. Rolando Ponce is Plaintiff Marco Ponce, Sr.’s brother and Defendant Faviola Ponce’s uncle. Marco Ponce alleges Faviola Ponce and Doe Defendants subjected Rolando Ponce to financial and psychological abuse by influencing Rolando Ponce to alter a power of attorney and other estate planning documents, isolating Rolando Ponce from other family members, manipulating control over Rolando Ponce’s assets, depriving Rolando Ponce of valuable real estate and personal property, and subjecting Rolando Ponce to physical and emotional abuse.

On June 26, 2024, Marco Ponce filed a complaint against Faviola Ponce, Doe Family 1, Doe Family 2, and Does 3-50, alleging the following causes of action: (1) elder abuse, (2) fraud, (3) forgery, (4) conversion, (5) identity theft, (6) negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED), and (7) intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED).

On August 15, 2024, Faviola Ponce filed the present demurrer. A hearing on the present demurrer is set for October 9, 2024, along with a case management conference and OSC Re: Failure to File Proof of Service on November 19, 2024.

ANALYSIS

Faviola Ponce demurs to Marco Ponce’s entire Complaint. For the following reasons, the court finds parties did not adequately meet and confer.

Legal Standard

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41, subdivision (a), prior to 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.” This section further provides that “the demurring party shall identify all of the specific causes of action that it believes are subject to demurrer and identify with legal support the basis of the deficiencies.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.41, subd. (a)(1).)

While Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41, subdivision (a)(4) makes clear failing to meet and confer is not grounds to overrule a demurrer, courts “are not required to ignore defects in the meet and confer process” and if the court determines “no meet and confer has taken place, or concludes further conferences between counsel would likely be productive, it retains discretion to order counsel to meaningfully discuss the pleadings with an eye toward reducing the number of issues or eliminating the need for a demurrer, and to continue the hearing date to facilitate that effort.” (Dumas v. Los Angeles County Bd. of Supervisors (2020) 45 Cal.App.5th 348, 355 & fn. 3.)

Discussion

In this case, Faviola Ponce’s counsel has not provided any declaration describing whether counsel met and conferred with Marco Ponce’s counsel. Because the court has no evidence parties met and conferred as required by code, the court finds parties have failed to adequately meet and confer. Thus, a continuance of the hearing on the demurrer is appropriate.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, Faviola Ponce’s demurrer is CONTINUED to a date to be determined at the hearing in Department G (Pomona).

Faviola Ponce’s counsel is also ordered to meet and confer with Marco Ponce’s counsel regarding the demurrer and to file a supplemental declaration describing such meet and confer efforts, including whether the attempts were made by telephone, video conference, or in person, at least (9) court days before the next scheduled hearing on the demurrer.