§Why CasetextPricing

Demurrer

Demurrer

15 Cited authorities

  1. Schifando v. City of Los Angeles

    31 Cal.4th 1074 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 1,286 times
    Denying request for judicial notice of irrelevant matter

  2. Cantu v. Resolution Trust Corp.

    4 Cal.App.4th 857 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 523 times
    Holding that "intentional infliction of emotional distress is an injury to the person"

  3. Goodman v. Kennedy

    18 Cal.3d 335 (Cal. 1976)   Cited 620 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendant attorney owed no duty to third parties who relied on faulty advice the attorney gave his clients "in the absence of any showing that the legal advice was foreseeably transmitted to or relied upon by plaintiffs or that plaintiffs were intended beneficiaries of a transaction to which the advice pertained"

  4. Hendy v. Losse

    54 Cal.3d 723 (Cal. 1991)   Cited 333 times
    Affirming an order sustaining defendants' demurrer without leave to amend when the plaintiff filed an amended complaint omitting harmful allegations from the original unverified complaint

  5. Borsuk v. Superior Court (La Hillcreste Apartments, LLC)

    242 Cal.App.4th 607 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 14 times
    Ordering transfer of petition for writ of mandate from the appellate division of the superior court to the court of appeal

  6. Lawrence v. Bank of America

    163 Cal.App.3d 431 (Cal. Ct. App. 1985)   Cited 44 times
    Explaining that the depositor failed to allege any facts which would support a finding that a fiduciary relationship existed between the bank and its depositor

  7. People v. Superior Court (Verdeja)

    5 Cal.App.4th 1480 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 27 times
    Checking box on Judicial Council complaint form insufficient to comply with general requirement that complaint state facts constituting cause of action

  8. Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Preciado

    224 Cal.App.4th Supp. 1 (Cal. Super. 2013)   Cited 4 times

    Nos. 1–12–AP–001360 1–12–AP–001361. 08-19-2013 The BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Vidal A. PRECIADO et al., Defendants and Appellants. The Bank of New York Mellon, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Roland Luke et al., Defendants and Appellants. Iscandari & Associates and Alieu Iscandari, Hayward, for Defendants and Appellants. Bryan Cave, Andrea Hicks, San Francisco; Miles Bauer Bergstrom & Winters, Santa Ana, and Christine Chung for Plaintiff and Respondent. Iscandari & Associates

  9. Liebovich v. Shahrokhkhany

    56 Cal.App.4th 511 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 16 times
    In Liebovich, the landlord served the tenant with a three-day notice to pay rent or quit via certified mail, and tenant denied that he ever received the notice.

  10. Parsons v. Superior Court

    149 Cal.App.4th Supp. 1 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 7 times
    Describing service of a proper notice to quit as a jurisdictional fact alleged in the complaint

  11. Section 1170 - [Effective 1/1/2025] Appearance by defendant

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1170   Cited 27 times

    (a)On or before the day fixed for their appearance, the defendant may appear and answer, demur, or move to strike any portion of the complaint. (b) (1)Notwithstanding any other law, in any action under this chapter in which the defendant demurs or moves to strike the complaint or any portion thereof, the hearing on the motion shall be not less than five court days nor more than seven court days after the filing of the notice of motion. For good cause shown, the court may order the hearing held on