Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 24STCV30339, Date: 2025-02-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV30339    Hearing Date: February 7, 2025    Dept: 47

Tentative Ruling

Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47

HEARING DATE:     February 7, 2025                   TRIAL DATE: NOT SET

CASE:                         Dong W. Kim v. Soon Ja Kim, et al.

CASE NO.:                 24STCV30339           

MOTION TO DISMISS

MOVING PARTY:               Defendant Hoejun Jeong in pro per

RESPONDING PARTY(S): Plaintiff Dong Wan Kim in pro per

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

            This is an action for defamation that was filed on November 18, 2024. Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants publicly and falsely accused Plaintiff of orchestrating a fraud scheme.

Defendant Hoejun Jeong moves to dismiss the Complaint.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant Hoejun Jeong moves to dismiss the Complaint.

            Although styled a “Motion to Dismiss,” Defendant brings this motion pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 430.10(e) and 425.16. This motion is therefore more properly considered a combined demurrer and special motion to strike pursuant to those statutes. (See Code Civ. Proc. §§ 425.16; 430.10(e).) However, Defendant’s motion fails to identify the legal or factual deficiencies in the Complaint’s allegations that would render it subject to demurrer beyond bare assertions that it is deficient with nonspecific citations to case law concerning the doctrine of unclean hands. (See Kendall-Jackson Winery Ltd. v. Superior Court (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 970; Blain v. Doctor’s Co. (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1048.) The extrinsic factual assertions and exhibits on which Defendant seeks to rely are not appropriate for a demurrer. (SKF Farms v. Superior Court (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 902, 905.)

            As to Defendant’s challenge under section 425.16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Defendant’s unsourced assertion that the statements alleged discuss matters of public concern—and therefore constitute protected activity—is not sufficient to demonstrate the veracity of that contention. Defendant has therefore not demonstrated that relief is appropriate on this alternative basis.

            Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.

            Moving Party to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:  February 7, 2025                                ___________________________________

                                                                                    Theresa M. Traber

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

            Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.