Judge: Virginia Keeny, Case: 24STCV18665, Date: 2025-03-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV18665    Hearing Date: March 21, 2025    Dept: 45

TYRONE MURPHY V. HINDEN & BRESLAVSKY APC

DEMURRER to plaintiff’s complaint

Date of Hearing:        March 21, 2025                     Trial Date:       None set.  

Department:              45                                            Case No.:        24STCV18665

Moving Party:            Defendants Hinden & Breslavsky, APC

Responding Party:     No opposition filed.  

Meet and Confer:      Kleyman Decl., ¶ 5

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Tyrone Murphy sued defendant Hinden & Breslavsky, APC (as “Hinden & Breslavsky, APC Attorney) on July 29, 2024. Defendant answered on November 1, 2024. Defendant filed the instant demurrer on November 7, 2024.

Defendant’s proof of service indicates it served him with its demurrer by U.S. Mail on November 5, 2024, at the address indicated on his complaint. Plaintiff filed no opposition, and Defendant no reply.

(The Court notes that mailed court notices have been returned undeliverable to Plaintiff’s address. But he did not identify any other means to contact him on his pleading. And in any case, he is not entitled to special efforts at notice simply because he is unrepresented.)

Plaintiff’s complaint asserts a single cause of action for breach of contract. (Compl., ¶ 8.) Plaintiff, representing himself in pro per, alleges “Defendant is a real legal attorney company that Plaintiff is file his lawsuit on Defendant attorney office. Lawsuit from damage from attorney work.” (Compl., ¶ 8 [sic].) In the portion of his form complaint meant for the defendant’s name, Plaintiff states “damage too Plaintiff Tyrone Murphy from not doing his legal work write cost me a lot of defendant damages I file my lawsuit for 1-million dollars.” (Id., ¶ 1 [sic].) He prays for damages of $1 million and “lawsuit for all damage from attorney work.” (Id., ¶ 10 [sic].)

[Tentative] Ruling

The demurrer is sustained with thirty (30) days’ leave to amend. Defendant to give notice.

ANALYSIS

Defendant demurs for uncertainty.

A demurrer for uncertainty lies where the pleading is uncertain, including where the pleading is ambiguous or unintelligible. (Code Civ. Proc. § 430.10, subd. (f); Landau v. Salam (1971) 4 Cal.3d 901, 909.) To survive demurrer, a plaintiff must set forth the essential facts of his case with reasonable precision and with particularity sufficient to acquaint a defendant with the nature, source, and extent of his cause of action. (See Semole v. Sansoucie (1972) 28 Cal.App.3d 714, 719.) 

Plaintiff’s complaint is unintelligible. The demurrer is sustained.

Because Plaintiff has yet to amend his complaint in response to demurrer and has not had the benefit of legal representation, the Court grants leave for him to file a first amended complaint within thirty (30) days. If he does not, Defendant may apply ex parte for dismissal.

Defendant to give notice.