Cross-Defendant's Demurrer
Stanislaus County - Civil - https://www.stanislaus.courts.ca.gov/online-services/tentative-rulings/civil-tentati ve-rulings Civil Tentative Rulings June 3, 2026
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge John R. Mayne in Department 21: ***There are no tentative rulings in Department 21***
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Stacy P. Speiller in Department 22: ***There are no tentative rulings in Department 22***
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Clifford Tong in Department 23:
CV-23-005517 - ASSYRIAN AMERICAN CIVIC CLUB EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION vs TURLOCK ADULT DAY CARE HEALTH CENTER INC - Cross-Defendant's Demurrer - SUSTAINED, in part, with leave to amend and in part, without leave to amend.
The Court finds that the First Amended Cross-Complaint fails to allege sufficient factual support for each of the stated claims against the moving Cross-Defendant herein, in that the pleading fails to allege specific conduct constituting Mr. Pourtaverdi's personal involvement in the purported wrongful conduct.
Additionally, he Court finds that the 4 th Cause of Action for Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage fails to sufficiently identify the requisite legal duty owed by Mr. Pourtaverdi to Cross-Complainant under the alleged circumstances.
With regard to the Fifth and Eighth Causes of Action, for Unfair Business Practices and Trespass to Chattels, respectively, the Court notes that Cross-Complainant concedes the insufficiency of the pleading of these claims but asserts that additional facts may be alleged to support the same in an amended pleading.
Based on the foregoing discussion, the demurrer is sustained with leave to amend as to the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Eighth Causes of Action. Cross-Complainant shall submit the Second Amended Cross-Complaint within 20 days.
Lastly, with regard to the Sixth Cause of Action for Conspiracy, the Court notes Cross-Complainant's agreement to withdraw this claim. Therefore, the demurrer is sustained without leave to amend, only as to that cause of action.
CV-25-005785 - MARDIKIAN, GEORGE vs THE SWEET ORGANIZATION INC - Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses - GRANTED, in part, with leave to amend; DENIED, in part.
The Court exercises its discretion to decline to strike the Answer as untimely filed. (See, e.g., Imagistics International, Inc. v. Department of General Services (2007) 150 Cal.App.4 th 581, 588.)
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
However, the Court finds that Defendants' 2 nd through 12 th affirmative defenses consist only of bare assertions without sufficient factual support for the new matter sought to be added thereby. (See, e.g. Department of Finance v. City of Merced (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 286, 294; FPI Development., Inc. v. Nakashima (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 367, 384.)
Therefore, the motion is granted as to the 2 nd - 12 th defenses. The Court grants leave to amend in this regard.
With regard to Defendant's first affirmative defense, the Court finds that no new matter is asserted thereby; rather, the subject "defense" challenges the viability of Plaintiff's claims and operates as a traverse rather than a true affirmative defense. As such, the matter is not required to be alleged in the answer, but the Court cannot conclude that the assertions made therein are irrelevant or improper in this context. Therefore, the motion is denied as to the 1 st defense.
Defendants shall submit their amended answer within 20 days.
CV-25-005797 - MEDINA, FABIAN ESTRELLA vs GENERAL MOTORS LLC - Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees, Costs and Expenses - GRANTED, in the reduced amount of $17.945.85.