Judge Salvatore Sirna, Case Number: 24STCV19831, Date: 2025-01-21 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 24STCV19831, Date: 2025-01-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV19831 Hearing Date: January 21, 2025 Dept: G

Defendant Blue Peak Mortgage, Inc.’s Demurrer to First Amended Complaint

Respondent: NO OPPOSITION

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Blue Peak Mortgage, Inc.’s Demurrer to First Amended Complaint is CONTINUED to a date to be determined at the hearing in Department G (Pomona).

Defendant Blue Peak Mortgage, Inc.’s Counsel is also ordered to meet and confer with Plaintiffs Jian Ye Li and Yinglun Zheng’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 an action for fraud. On August 6, 2024, Plaintiffs Jian Ye Li and Yinglun Zheng filed a complaint against Defendants Qisong Zhao; Blue Peak Mortgage, Inc. (Blue Peak); Ka Man Chiang; Andrew P. Wing; Jian Qian Zheng; Ka Sing Chiang; Corinna Cheng; WFG National Title Company (WFG); T. Sitanggang; Joselyn H. Shin; any person or entity known or unknown; and Does 1-20, alleging the following causes of action: (1) cancellation of deed of trust and any encumbrances, (2) cancellation of grant deed, (3) quiet title, (4) fraud, and (5) negligence.

On September 13, 2024, Blue Peak filed a demurrer to the Complaint.

On October 24, 2024, Ka Man Chiang, Wing, Jian Quan Zheng, Ka Sing Chiang, and Cheng filed a separate demurrer and motion to strike as to the Complaint.

On November 20, 2024, Li and Yinglun Zheng filed a First Amended Complaint (FAC) against the same defendants as well as Defendants Tower Escrow, Inc. (Tower Escrow) and Rena Wong, alleging the following causes of action: (1) slander of title, (2) fraud, (3) cancellation of grant deed, (4) cancellation of deed of trust and related instruments, (5) negligence, and (6) quiet title.

On December 16, 2024, Blue Peak filed the present demurrer. A hearing on the present demurrer is set for January 21, 2025, along with a CMC and OSC Re: Failure to File Proof of Service as to the FAC.

ANALYSIS

Blue Peak demurs to Li and Yinglung Zheng’s entire FAC. 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, Blue Peak’s counsel has provided a declaration stating counsel met and conferred with Li and Yinglung Zheng’s counsel on December 16, 2024. (Clark Decl., ¶ 2.) Because Blue Peak’s counsel fails to specify how counsel met and conferred as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41, subdivision (a)(3)(A), a continuance of the hearing on the demurrer is appropriate for parties to further meet and confer.

CONCLUSION

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

Blue Peak’s counsel is also ordered to meet and confer with Li and Yinglung Zheng’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.