WELLS FARGO BANK, NA vs. AMANDA FOGELMAN, an individual

June 12, 2026 Dept. 9 Tentative Rulings

13. 24CV0902 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA vs. AMANDA FOGELMAN, an individual MOTION FOR JUDGEMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

Plaintiff filed this Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings on April 23, 2026. The motion requests the court take notice of admitted matters based on the court’s order deeming admissions admitted from August 25, 2025. The court grants the request for judicial notice.

A plaintiff may move for judgment on the pleadings if the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against that defendant and the answer fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the complaint. Code Civ.Pro. § 438 (c)(1)(A). The standard for granting a motion for judgment on the pleadings is essentially the same as that applicable to a general demurrer, Burnett v. Chimney Sweep (2004) 123 Cal.App.4th 1057, 1064. “A plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings is analogous to a plaintiff's demurrer to an answer and is evaluated by the same standards. (See Hardy v.

Admiral Oil Co. (1961) 56 Cal.2d 836, 840-842, 16 Cal.Rptr. 894, 366 P.2d 310; 4 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (1971) Proceedings Without Trial, § 165, pp. 2819- 2820.) The motion should be denied if the defendant's pleadings raise a material issue or set up an affirmative matter constituting a defense; for purposes of ruling on the motion, the trial court must treat all of the defendant's allegations as being true. (MacIsaac v. Pozzo (1945) 26 Cal.2d 809, 813, 161 P.2d 449.)” Allstate Ins. Co. v. Kim W. (1984) 160 Cal.App.3d 326, 330-331.

However, where the defendant’s pleadings show no defense to the action, then judgment on the pleadings in favor of the plaintiff is proper. See Knoff v. City etc. of San Francisco (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 184, 200.

Courts may consider judicially noticeable matters in the motion as well. Kapsimallis v. Allstate Ins. Co. (2002) 104 Cal.App.4th 667, 672; People ex rel. Harris v. Pac Anchor Transp., Inc. (2014) 59 Cal.4th 772, 777. “The court will take judicial notice of records such as admissions, answers to interrogatories, affidavits, and the like, when considering a demurrer, only where they contain statements of the plaintiff or his agent which are inconsistent with the allegations of the pleading before the court.

The hearing on demurrer may not be turned into a contested evidentiary hearing through the guise of having the court take judicial notice of affidavits, declarations, depositions, and other such material which was filed on behalf of the adverse party and which purports to contradict the allegations and contentions of the plaintiff. (Tyree v. Epstein, 99 Cal.App.2d 361, 221 P.2d 1002.) [Footnote omitted.]” (Emphasis added.) Del E. Webb Corp. v. Structural Materials Co. (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 593, 604-605.

Therefore, only the opposing defendants’ discovery responses may be considered in ruling on a motion for judgment on the pleadings on those defendants’ answer and affirmative defenses.

June 12, 2026 Dept. 9 Tentative Rulings

Court finds the evidence supports the Motion for Judgement on the pleadings based on the exhibits and admitted matters. Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings is granted.

TENTATIVE RULING #13: THE MOTION FOR JUDGEMENT ON THE PLEADINGS IS GRANTED. NO HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HELD UNLESS A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT IS TRANSMITTED ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE COURT’S WEBSITE OR BY TELEPHONE TO THE COURT AT (530) 621-6551 BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. CAL. RULE CT. 3.1308; LOCAL RULE 8.05.07; SEE ALSO LEWIS V. SUPERIOR COURT, 19 CAL.4TH 1232, 1247 (1999).

NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES OF A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT AND THE GROUNDS UPON WHICH ARGUMENT IS BEING REQUESTED MUST BE MADE BY TELEPHONE OR IN PERSON BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. CAL. RULE CT. 3.1308; EL DORADO COUNTY LOCAL RULE 8.05.07. PROOF OF SERVICE OF SAID NOTICE MUST BE FILED PRIOR TO OR AT THE HEARING.

LONG CAUSE HEARINGS MUST BE REQUESTED BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED AND THE PARTIES ARE TO PROVIDE THE COURT WITH THREE MUTUALLY AGREEABLE DATES ON FRIDAY AFTERNOONS AT 2:30 P.M. LONG CAUSE ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTS WILL BE SET FOR HEARING ON ONE OF THE THREE MUTUALLY AGREEABLE DATES ON FRIDAY AFTERNOONS AT 2:30 P.M. THE COURT WILL ADVISE THE PARTIES OF THE LONG CAUSE HEARING DATE AND TIME BY 5:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. PARTIES MAY PERSONALLY APPEAR AT THE HEARING.

24