Kevin Morrison v. Jeanne Wong, et al.

TENTATIVE RULINGS 6-1-26 Department R17- Judge Gilbert G. Ochoa

This court follows California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(a) (1) for tentative rulings. (See San Bernardino Superior Court Local Emergency Rule 8.) Tentative rulings for each law & motion will be posted on the internet (https://www.sb-court.org) by 3:00 p.m. on the court day immediately before the hearing.

If you do not have internet access or if you experience difficulty with the posted tentative ruling, you may obtain the tentative ruling by calling the Administrative Assistant. You may appear in person at the hearing but personal appearance is not required and remote appearance by CourtCall is preferred during the Pandemic. (See www.sbcourt.org/general-information/remote-access)

If you wish to submit on the ruling, call the Court call the Court, check-in and state that you will be submitting on the Tentative, and your appearance is not necessary. But you must check in. If both sides do not appear, the tentative will simply become the ruling. If any party submits on the tentative, the Court will not alter the tentative and it will become the ruling. If one party wants to argue, Court will hear argument but will not change the tentative. If the Court does decide to modify tentative after argument, then a further hearing for oral argument will be reset for both parties to be heard at the same time by the Court. This procedure is meant to minimize your waiting time in Court.

KEVIN MORRISON, an individual;

v.

JEANNE WONG, an individual; and ROES 1- 20, inclusive.

Motion: Demurrer to First Amended Complaint

Movant: Defendant Jeanne Wong

Respondent: Plaintiff Kevin Morrison

DISCUSSION

Analysis

Meet and Confer Requirement. Before filing a demurrer, the moving party shall meet and

confer in person or by telephone with the party who filed the pleading for purposes of

“determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objections to be raised

in the demurrer.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.41, subd. (a).) The meet and confer also applies to

Page | 14

amended pleadings (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.41, subd. (a)) and shall occur at least 5 days before

the date the responsive pleading is due. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.41, subd. (a)(2).) If there is no

resolution, the demurring party shall submit a declaration with his/her demurrer stating either (a)

the means in which the parties met and conferred and no resolution reached, or (b) the opposing

party failed to respond to the demurring party’s meet and confer requests or failed to meet and

confer in good faith. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.41, subd. (a)(3).) The Court can mark a matter off

calendar due to the Local Rule 560. (“In the Court’s discretion, the Court may, on its own

motion, take off calendar the following: (1) motions that are not supported by a declaration

establishing that an in person or telephonic meet and confer or other required meet and confer

occurred or is deficient.”)

Darren P. Trone, Esq. filed a Judicial Council of California meet and confer declaration

checking off the box that the Plaintiff failed to respond to his meet and confer request or

otherwise failed to meet and confer in good faith. He attached a letter he mailed to Plaintiff’s

counsel on February 20, 2026, however there is no indication the parties spoke. In the

opposition, Plaintiff claims there was never a conversation and the Defendant failed to meet and

confer. In reply, the Defendant admits he did not call but the letter accomplishes the purpose of

the statute. The Court CONTINUES the demurrer requiring Defendant to comply with the

meet and confer requirements implemented by the Legislature. This is not a new

requirement and it requires the parties to actually speak prior to filing a demurrer. All

sides are ordered to comply with the meet and confer requirement.

Movant to give notice.

Dated-

____________________________ Judge

Page | 15