DEMURRER to ANSWER to COMPLAINT
Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Monday, June 29, 2026, Line 9. 2 - Plaintiff Dylan Moore's demurrer to Defendant BMW of North America, LLC's answer is OVERRULED IN PART AND SUSTAINED IN PART.
Plaintiff's demurrer is timely. Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30(b) states that: "The answer to a complaint shall contain: (1) The general or specific denial of the material allegations of the complaint controverted by the defendant. (2) A statement of any new matter constituting a defense." A plaintiff may demur to an answer if "(a) the answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense, (b) the answer is uncertain [or] (c) where the answer pleads a contract, it cannot be ascertained from the answer whether the contract is written or oral." (Code Civ.
Proc. 430.20.) In order to survive demurrer, an answer must include specific facts, rather than mere "terse legal conclusions." (FPI Development, Inc. v. Nakashima (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 367, 384.) An answer must be pled with facts "averred as carefully and with as much detail as the facts which constitute the cause of action and are alleged in the complaint." (Ibid.)
Here, Plaintiff argues that Defendant's answer is both uncertain and fails to state facts sufficient to constitute affirmative defenses. The court is unpersuaded by Plaintiff's uncertainty argument. Similarly, the court is unpersuaded by Defendant's argument that Affirmative Defense 9 violates Code of Civil procedure section 458; the answer clearly states the relevant statutes of limitations. (Answer at 3:20-21.) Defendant's answer, however, does fail to state sufficient facts to support its affirmative defenses. Defendant's answer alleges 29 affirmative defenses, yet it does not state any facts to support any of these affirmative defenses. On these grounds, the court sustains the demurrer and grants Defendant leave to amend the answer to include factual allegations. Defendant must amend within 20 court days from notice of this order.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number. Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests.
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?”
The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing. Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/JMQ) | |