Judge: Teresa A. Beaudet, Case: 22STCV25865, Date: 2023-04-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV25865    Hearing Date: April 24, 2023    Dept: 50

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50

Background

            Plaintiff Harut Firakyan, by and through his guardian ad litem, Lora Mahtesyan (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on August 10, 2022 against Defendants CHA Hollywood Medical Center, L.P. dba Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center D/P SNF and CHA Hollywood Medical Center, L.P. dba Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center. The Complaint alleges causes of action for (1) elder abuse/neglect, (2) negligence, and (3) violation of resident’s rights.

CHA Hollywood Medical Center, L.P. dba Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center (“Defendant”), erroneously sued as CHA Hollywood Medical Center, L.P. dba Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center D/P SNF, now demurs to the first and third causes of action of the Complaint. Defendant also moves to strike portions of the Complaint.[1] Plaintiff opposes both.

Discussion

As an initial matter, the Court notes that Defendant’s counsel’s declarations filed in support of the demurrer and motion to strike indicate, inter alia, that “[o]n September 28, 2022, I emailed a meet and confer letter, addressing all of the deficiencies in Plaintiff’s Complaint, as outlined hereinabove and informing them of Defendant’s intent to file and serve a Demurrer and Motion Strike as to Plaintiff’s Complaint and requesting a response by October 7, 2022. Attached hereto is a true and correct copy of this September 28, 2022, letter, as Exhibit ‘A’.” (Alvarado Decls., ¶ 4.) Defendant’s counsel states that “[o]n October 10, 2022, Plaintiff’s counsel emailed my firm’s paralegal, Ms. Bristow, and only her stating: ‘Thank you for your meet and confer correspondence. I do believe our causes of action are more than sufficiently pled.’” (Alvarado Decls., ¶ 5.)

The Court notes that Defendant’s counsel’s declarations do not demonstrate that the parties met and conferred by telephone or in person. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41, subdivision (a), “[b]efore filing a demurrer pursuant to this chapter, 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.” (Emphasis added.) In addition, “[b]efore filing a motion to strike…the moving party shall meet and confer in person or by telephone with the party who filed the pleading that is subject to the motion to strike for the purpose of determining if an agreement can be reached that resolves the objections to be raised in the motion to strike.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 435.5, subd. (a), emphasis added.)

 Such meeting and conferring must be done in good faith with an effort to try to resolve the issues subject to the demurrer and motion to strike.

In light of the foregoing, the hearing on Defendant’s demurrer and motion to strike is continued to _______________, 2023 at 2 p.m. in Dept. 50.¿

Defendant is ordered to meet¿and confer¿with Plaintiff¿within 10 days of the date of this order.¿If the parties are unable to resolve the pleading issues¿or if the parties are otherwise unable to meet and confer in good faith, Defendant is to¿thereafter¿file and serve¿a declaration setting forth the efforts to meet and confer in compliance with¿Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41, subdivision (a)(3) and Code of Civil Procedure section 435.5, subdivision (a)(3)within 15 days of this order.¿ 

.Additionally, Plaintiff is reminded of the requirement to deliver a courtesy copy of the opposition to Dept 50.  No such courtesy copy was received by the Court.

Dendant is ordered to give notice of this order.¿ 

DATED:  April 24, 2023                                ________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court