JUNCHAN LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY VS. PATRICK GALLAGHER ET AL

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC25627978 - February 5, 2026 Hearing date: February 5, 2026 Case number: CGC25627978 Case title: JUNCHAN LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY VS. PATRICK GALLAGHER ET AL Case Number: | | CGC25627978 | Case Title: | | JUNCHAN LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY VS. PATRICK GALLAGHER ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-02-05 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | DEMURRER to COMPLAINT | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for February 5, 2026 line 4.

DEFENDANT'S DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT is SUSTAINED with leave to amend for Plaintiff to allege: a misrepresentation by each defendant as to the costs associated with the Parking Facility Agreement and Parking License Agreement; that such costs are included in the "latest HOA fees and any related expenses," (see the inquiry alleged in paragraph 21 of Complaint) and should have been disclosed as such; that the agents/brokers have a duty to disclose the "exact monthly costs" under the Parking Facility Agreement and Parking License Agreement (see paragraph 42 of the Complaint), the agreements of which Plaintiff was aware (see Paragraph 42 of the Complaint); recoverable damages against the seller's agent/broker.

Oversized (18-pages) opposition with no Table of Contents or Table of Authorities is stricken.

Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice is DENIED. Request is DENIED as to Ex. B and C. The same exhibits are attached to the complaint and the request for judicial notice serves no substantive purpose, albeit could have been more convenient for review of the documents.

The Court notes that exhibits attached to the complaint do contain multiple unexplained blank pages between numbered pages. Plaintiff should consider removing the blank pages when filing an amended complaint unless Plaintiff believes that those pages are an integral part of the exhibits.

Declaration of Dowling is stricken. Not appropriate on a demurrer. The Court will not take judicial notice of the e-mail over an objection as at this stage of the litigation. Without resorting to extrinsic evidence (e.g. declaration) it is not possible to determine that the e-mail constitutes "sources of reasonably indisputable accuracy." (Evid Code 452(h)). In other words, the e-mails attached to Ex. A may or may not be the e-mails referenced in the Complaint. The Court notes that Plaintiff chose not to include the e-mails and the attachment to the e-mail to the Complaint while referencing those documents in the Complaint (See paragraphs 21-22).

Plaintiff also objected to judicial notice of the e-mail and attachment notably not arguing that Defendants exhibits are not the copies of the e-mails referenced in the Complaint. While not required, Plaintiff should consider attaching the e-mail and the attachment to the amended complaint to avoid unnecessary motion practice and discovery. =(501/REQ)