Judge: Thomas D. Long, Case: 24STCV14700, Date: 2025-03-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV14700    Hearing Date: March 18, 2025    Dept: 48

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On June 12, 2024, Plaintiff 17201 Figueroa LLC filed this against Defendant Winsfargo Transport Inc.  On August 19, 2024, Defendant filed a demurrer.

A demurrer for sufficiency tests whether the complaint states a cause of action.  (Hahn v. Mirda (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 740, 747.)  When considering demurrers, courts read the allegations liberally and in context, accepting the alleged facts as true.  (Nolte v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 1401, 1406.)  Courts also consider exhibits attached to the complaint and incorporated by reference.  (See Frantz v. Blackwell (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 91, 94.)

Defendant demurs to the sole cause of action for breach of contract.  The standard elements of a claim for breach of contract are (1) the contract, (2) plaintiff’s performance or excuse for nonperformance, (3) defendant’s breach, and (4) damage to plaintiff therefrom.  (Wall Street Network, Ltd. v. New York Times Co. (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 1171, 1178.)  “A written contract may be pleaded by its terms—set out verbatim in the complaint or a copy of the contract attached to the complaint and incorporated therein by reference—or by its legal effect.”  (McKell v. Washington Mutual, Inc. (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1457, 1489.)

Defendant argues that the Complaint “is very messy and confusing” because “[t]here are multiple documents, multiple contracts, and multiple defendants – and zero indication of which defendants are allegedly tied to which contract or document.”  (Demurrer at p. 4.)  “The Complaint is uncertain because it fails to state or identify which parties signed which alleged contract (since there are many) and also fails to allege which of the many alleged contracts the Defendants (and each of them) breached.”  (Id. at p. 5.)

The Complaint clearly alleges that Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a commercial lease agreement on December 6, 2017.  (Complaint ¶¶ 4, 8.)  Other now-dismissed defendants executed personal guaranty agreements.  (Complaint ¶ 8.)  The single contract between Plaintiff and Defendant is accompanied by amendments to the security deposit and base rent amount.  (Complaint, Exs. A-D.)  All of these documents are attached to the Complaint.  Defendants breached the contract by failing to pay rent and other fees ($162,456.63) and by causing damage to the property (at least $300,000.00).  (Complaint ¶ 10.)

The demurrer is OVERRULED.  Defendant is ordered to file an answer within ten days.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMCDEPT48@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit.  If all parties in the case submit on the tentative ruling, no appearances before the Court are required unless a companion hearing (for example, a Case Management Conference) is also on calendar.

         Dated this 18th day of March 2025