Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 24PSCV03965, Date: 2025-03-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24PSCV03965    Hearing Date: March 10, 2025    Dept: G

Defendant Jeffrey B. Crevoiserat’s Demurrer to Complaint

Respondent: Plaintiff Adhara Aerospace and Defense, LLC

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Jeffrey B. Crevoiserat’s Demurrer to Complaint is CONTINUED to a date to be determined at the hearing in Department G (Pomona).

Defendant Jeffrey B. Crevoiserat’s Counsel is also ordered to meet and confer with Plaintiff Adhara Aerospace and Defense, LLC’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 nine (9) court days before the next scheduled hearing on the Demurrer.

BACKGROUND

This is a breach of guaranty action. On November 15, 2024, Plaintiff Adhara Aerospace and Defense, LLC (Adhara) filed a complaint against Defendant Jeffrey B. Crevoiserat and Does 1-10, alleging a single cause of action for breach of guaranty.

On January 22, 2025, Crevoiserat filed the present demurrer. A hearing on the present demurrer is set for March 10, 2025, along with a CMC and OSC Re: Failure to File Proof of Service on April 17, 2025.

ANALYSIS

Crevoiserat demurs to Adhara’s cause of action for breach of guaranty. 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, Crevoiserat’s counsel provided a declaration stating counsel met and conferred with Adhara’s counsel by emailing a letter on January 10, 2025. (Gordon Decl., ¶ 1.) Because emails and written correspondence are not code-compliant forms of meeting and conferring, a continuance of the hearing on the demurrer is appropriate for the parties to further meet and confer.

CONCLUSION

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

Crevoiserat’s counsel is also ordered to meet and confer with Adhara’s counsel regarding the present 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 nine (9) court days before the next scheduled hearing on the demurrer.