Givon v. Shushan

Plaintiff alleges unidentified third parties attacked him. Plaintiff does not allege that Allied employees participated in the attack, nor that Allied had knowledge of any specific threat to plaintiff. Plaintiff's allegations sound in negligence; plaintiff failed to show Allied engaged in vile, base or contemptible conduct or otherwise acted with malice or reckless disregard. General knowledge of criminal activity in an area is not equivalent to knowledge that a particular violent assault was probable, nor does it establish a deliberate decision by Allied to disregard a risk to plaintiff.

Further, plaintiff failed to establish ratification by an Allied managing agent. White, supra, recognizes that the identity of a managing agent may not be clear at the initial pleading stage; it does not abrogate the statutory requirement for plaintiff to identify an agent. Plaintiff offers no facts in support of his argument that the decision to understaff the subject premises was made at the managerial level. This is insufficient to sustain a claim for punitive damages. Plaintiff requests leave to amend, arguing liberal amendments are permitted in California.

Although leave to amend is liberally granted, it is not required where the defect is incapable of being cured by amendment. Heckendorn v. City of San Marino (1986) 42 Cal.3d 481, 486. Plaintiff fails to identify what, if any, facts exist that could demonstrate malice, fraud or oppression such that punitive damages would be awardable. As plaintiff's claims sound in negligence, and as even gross negligence is insufficient to allow an award of punitive damages, leave to amend would be futile. GRANTED; Complaint, Page 13, prayer for judgment, No. 5: "For punitive damages" is struck.

No leave to amend at this time; should discovery reveal facts that might justify an award of punitive damages, plaintiff may make a motion for leave to amend to reallege such. Givon v. Shushan, Case no. 25VECV06837 Hearing date August 28, 2026 Defendants' Demurrer with Motion to Strike the Complaint Plaintiff Givon sues defendants Shushan, Libman and A.B.S. Industries, Inc. for breach of contract. Defendants demur and move to strike the entire complaint, or in the alternative the prayers for pre-judgment interest and attorney's fees.

Plaintiff opposes. Defendants' Demurrer to the Complaint "The function of a demurrer is to test the sufficiency of the complaint as a matter of law." Holiday Matinee, Inc. v. Rambus, Inc. (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 1413, 1420. A complaint "is sufficient if it alleges ultimate rather than evidentiary facts." Doe v. City of Los Angeles (2007) 42 Cal.4th 531, 550, but plaintiff must allege essential facts "with reasonable precision and with particularity sufficient to acquaint [the] defendant with the nature, source and extent" of the plaintiff's claim.

Doheny Park Terrace Homeowners Ass'n., Inc. v. Truck Ins. Exchange (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 1076, 1099.

Defendants demur to the sole cause of action for breach of contract, arguing the complaint is fatally vague as to what contract plaintiff is suing under. The complaint alleges plaintiff "issued multiple loans to defendants, totaling approximately $990,000." Compl., p.

3. The complaint does not attach any alleged loan documents nor enumerate how many loans were issued. Plaintiff argues he complied with the pleading requirements. To state a cause of action for breach of contract, plaintiff must allege: (1) existence of a contract, (2) plaintiff's performance or excuse for nonperformance, (3) defendant's breach, and (4) resulting damages. Oasis West Realty, LLC v. Goldman (2011) 51 Cal.4th 811, 821. Plaintiff argues the complaint alleges existence of the loans, plaintiff's performance by providing the loan funds, defendants' breach and damages of $336,949.85. See Compl., p.

3. Plaintiff argues the particular terms of each loan need not be alleged, as plaintiff alleged a 9% interest rate and a one-year repayment deadline. Id. Defendants are entitled to allegations that contain sufficient specificity that they can understand under which loan(s) plaintiff brings his claim. See Doheny Park Terrace Homeowners Ass'n., Inc., supra. The allegation that plaintiff made multiple loans to defendants requires plaintiff to delineate the terms of each loan, including whether each was written or oral, the amount and which defendant(s) was party to each loan.

These are not evidentiary minutiae, as argued by plaintiff, but are basic details which must be pled, as plaintiff alleges more than one loan was made. As pled, it is uncertain how many loans were made, what portion of the alleged damages arises from each and what form each loan took. SUSTAINED with 15 days leave to amend. Defendants' Motion to Strike the Complaint As the court sustained the demurrer with leave to amend, the motion to strike is MOOT. | Home -->)" -->