Judge: Teresa A. Beaudet, Case: 24STCV03875, Date: 2024-09-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV03875    Hearing Date: September 25, 2024    Dept: 50

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50

Background

Plaintiff Christopher Rosales (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on February 15, 2024 against a number of defendants, including Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. The Complaint alleges causes of action for (1) assault, (2) battery, (3) intentional infliction of emotional distress, (4) negligent hiring, supervision and retention, and (5) negligence.

Defendant Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“Metro”) now demurs to the fourth cause of action of the Complaint and moves to strike the fourth cause of action from the Complaint. Plaintiff opposes both.

Discussion

As an initial matter, Metro’s counsel’s declaration in support of the demurrer indicates, inter alia, that “I sent a meet and confer correspondence and proposed stipulation regarding the issues in this demurrer and accompanying motion to strike. As of the filing of this demurrer, Plaintiff has not agreed to amend and/or stipulate. Should Plaintiff agree, Metro will take the demurrer off the Court’s calendar.” (Yehoshua Decl., ¶ 2.) In addition, Metro’s counsel’s declaration in support of the motion to strike provides, inter alia, that “[p]rior to filing the instant motion to strike, I attempted to meet and confer regarding the instant motion by sending a meet and confer correspondence to Plaintiff’s counsel and sending a proposed stipulation to Plaintiff’s counsel. As of the date of the filing of the instant motion to strike, Plaintiff has not agreed to stipulate to strike the language at issue. We will continue to attempt to reach a resolution without the need for court intervention.” (Yehoshua Decl., ¶ 2.)

The Court notes that Metro’s counsel’s declarations do not demonstrate that the parties met and conferred by telephone or in person, or that Metro’s counsel attempted to do so.

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 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 Metro’s demurrer and motion to strike is continued to _______________, 2024 at 2 p.m. in Dept. 50. 

Metro 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, Metro 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.¿

Metro is ordered to give notice of this order. 

DATED:  September 25, 2024                       ________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court