Rize LKMS, LLC vs. Richardson

the same grounds and with the same information as in the Motion for Reconsideration.

A motion to strike is generally used to address defects that appear on the face of a pleading or from matters of which a judge may take judicial notice and that are not grounds for demurrer. (Pierson v. Sharp Memorial Hospital (1989) 216 Cal.App.3d 340, 342.)

As to the Defendant’s assertion that this Court is acting as an advocate by referencing a code section in its ruling, the Court finds no merit to that charge by the Defendants. The California Court of Appeal held ““Courts are established to discover where lies the truth when issues are contested, and the final responsibility to see that justice is done rests with the judge.’” (People v. Carlucci (1979) 23 Cal.3d 249, 255 [152 Cal. Rptr. 439, 590 P.2d 15] (Carlucci) [discussing Evid. Code, § 775's codification of “traditional case law”]; accord, Conservatorship of Pamela J. (2005) 133 Cal.App.4th 807, 827 [35 Cal.

Rptr. 3d 228] (Pamela J.).) As the Court of Appeal in Pamela J. explained, “‘It apparently cannot be repeated too often for the guidance of a part of the legal profession that a judge is not a mere umpire presiding over a contest of wits between professional opponents, but a judicial officer entrusted with the grave task of determining where justice lies under the law and the facts between the parties who have sought the protection of our courts. Within reasonable limits, it is not only the right but the duty of a trial judge to clearly bring out the facts so that the important functions of his office may be fairly and justly performed.’” (Pamela J., at p. 827.).” (In re Emily D. (2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 438, 446-447.)