10 Cited authorities

Martin v. Bridgeport Community Assn., Inc.
173 Cal.App.4th 1024 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 160 times
Holding that the facts pleaded did not clearly manifest an intent to benefit the party claiming third-party beneficiary status
Heritage Pacific Financial, LLC v. Monroy
215 Cal.App.4th 972 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) Cited 141 times
Noting that the plaintiff requested and received statutory damages under the RFDCPA even though she neither alleged nor received actual damages
Align Technology, Inc. v. Tran
179 Cal.App.4th 949 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 80 times
Holding "legislative purpose of former section 439, the predecessor of section 426.30 . . . was to provide for the settlement, in a single action, of all conflicting claims between the parties arising out of the same transaction" and to "avoid a multiplicity of actions"
Color-Vue, Inc. v. Abrams
44 Cal.App.4th 1599 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996) Cited 88 times
Holding that a corporation's lack of capacity was a plea in abatement that the opposing party waived by failing to raise early in the litigation
George v. Auto. Club of South. California
201 Cal.App.4th 1112 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) Cited 47 times
Applying rule, but finding no ambiguity
Friendly Village Community v. Silva Hill Constr
31 Cal.App.3d 220 (Cal. Ct. App. 1973) Cited 69 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[a]n element of a cause of action for injury to real property is the plaintiff's ownership, lawful possession, or right to possession, of the property"
Trustees of Capital Wholesale v. Shearson Lehman
221 Cal.App.3d 617 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990) Cited 29 times
Dismissing claim for breach of the implied covenant without leave to amend where plaintiff failed to allege facts to support such claim
Hilltop Properties v. State of California
233 Cal.App.2d 349 (Cal. Ct. App. 1965) Cited 52 times
Holding plaintiff stated a promissory estoppel cause of action against the state based on allegations that it detrimentally relied on a promise by state officials to buy certain real property
Tarr v. Merco Construction Engineers, Inc.
84 Cal.App.3d 707 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978) Cited 8 times
Docket No. 52048. September 8, 1978. Appeal from Superior Court of Los Angeles County, SWC34875, Abraham Gorenfeld, Temporary Judge. Pursuant to Constitution, article VI, section 21. COUNSEL Richard L. Turner for Plaintiff and Appellant. Grant Popovich and Irvin Grant for Defendants and Respondents. OPINION JEFFERSON (Bernard), J. This is an appeal by plaintiff Ernest J. Tarr from a judgment of dismissal of his third amended complaint following the trial court's sustaining of a demurrer. The defendants
Robertson v. Burrell
110 Cal. 568 (Cal. 1895) Cited 38 times
In Robertson v. Burrell, 110 Cal. 568, 42 P. 1086, a partnership business was formed by Robertson & Burrell for the purpose of engaging in the business of raising, buying, and selling stock, transacting a general farming business, and dealing in real estate and other property.

Hearing Demurrer

10 Cited authorities

Holding that the facts pleaded did not clearly manifest an intent to benefit the party claiming third-party beneficiary status

Noting that the plaintiff requested and received statutory damages under the RFDCPA even though she neither alleged nor received actual damages

Holding "legislative purpose of former section 439, the predecessor of section 426.30 . . . was to provide for the settlement, in a single action, of all conflicting claims between the parties arising out of the same transaction" and to "avoid a multiplicity of actions"

Holding that a corporation's lack of capacity was a plea in abatement that the opposing party waived by failing to raise early in the litigation

Applying rule, but finding no ambiguity

Holding that "[a]n element of a cause of action for injury to real property is the plaintiff's ownership, lawful possession, or right to possession, of the property"

Dismissing claim for breach of the implied covenant without leave to amend where plaintiff failed to allege facts to support such claim

Holding plaintiff stated a promissory estoppel cause of action against the state based on allegations that it detrimentally relied on a promise by state officials to buy certain real property

In Robertson v. Burrell, 110 Cal. 568, 42 P. 1086, a partnership business was formed by Robertson & Burrell for the purpose of engaging in the business of raising, buying, and selling stock, transacting a general farming business, and dealing in real estate and other property.