Judge Teresa A. Beaudet, Case Number: 23STCV30771, Date: 2024-04-17 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiffs Northland THEA LLC; Northland THEA Portfolio LLC; Northland THEA Portfolio II LLC; Northland THEA Portfolio III LLC; and Northland THEA IV LLC (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action on December 15, 2023 against Defendants Ashley Wynn and Chelsea Wynn (jointly, “Defendants”). The Complaint alleges one cause of action for breach of lease.

Defendants appear to demur to the Complaint. Defendants also appear to move to strike the Complaint.[1] Plaintiffs oppose both.

As an initial matter, to the extent Defendants demur to the Complaint in this action and move to strike the Complaint in this action, Defendants do not show that they complied with applicable meet and confer requirements.

Defendants did not file any declarations in support of the demurrer or motion to strike demonstrating that they met and conferred with Plaintiffs in advance of filing the demurrer and motion to strike. In addition, Plaintiffs’ counsel’s declaration in support of the opposition provides, inter alia, that “[t]he Wynns did not attempt to meet and confer with Northland and it’s counsel prior to filing their Demurrer and Motion to Strike in this case.” (Godwin Decl., ¶ 13.)

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, by telephone, or by video conference 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 pursuant to this chapter, the moving party shall meet and confer in person, by telephone, or by video conference 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 of Civil Procedure section 435.5, subdivision (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 Defendants’ demurrer and motion to strike is continued to _______________, 2024 at 2 p.m. in Dept. 50.

Defendants are¿ordered to meet¿and confer¿with Plaintiffs 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, Defendants are 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.¿

[1]The Court notes that Defendants’ notice of demurrer provides, inter alia, that Defendants “move the Court for and [sic] order sustaining a general demurrer to the Unlawful Detainer Complaint filed by Plaintiff without leave to amend.” (Notice of Demurrer at P1:26-P2:1.) In addition, Defendants’ notice of motion states, inter alia, that Defendants “move for an order from the court striking the Complaint for Unlawful Detainer…in this action.” (Notice of Motion at p. 1:26-2:1.) However, a “Complaint for Unlawful Detainer” was not filed in this action. As discussed above, the Complaint in this action alleges one cause of action for breach of lease.

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50