Krista Joiner v. Boulevard Management, Inc., et al.

regarding Plaintiff's claims in discovery. (Khoury v. Maly's of Cal., Inc. (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 612, 616 ["A demurrer for uncertainty is strictly construed, even where a complaint is in some respects uncertain, because ambiguities can be clarified under modern discovery procedures"].) However, as Defendants point out, Barber is not a party to the contract at issue. Accordingly, Barber's demurrer to the fourth cause of action is sustained with leave to amend.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Campos's demurrer to the complaint is sustained with leave to amend. Defendants' demurrer to the second cause of action is sustained without leave to amend. Barber's demurrer to the fourth cause of action is sustained with leave to amend. The demurrer is otherwise overruled. Plaintiff is to file an amended complaint within 20 days of notice of this order. Defendants are ordered to provide notice of the Court's ruling and to file proof of service of same.

DEPARTMENT | 415 | HEARING DATE | August 20, 2026 | CASE NUMBER |

| MOTIONS | Motion to Stay Proceedings; Motion for Protective Order | MOVING PARTIES | Defendants Boulevard Management, Inc., Lester Knispel, Mary Susan Barner, and Altaira Campos | OPPOSING PARTY |

Plaintiff Krista Joiner | MOTION

Defendants Boulevard Management, Inc., Lester Knispel, Mary Susan Barner, and Altaira Campos ("Defendants") move to stay this action pending resolution of the property division trial in In re Marriage of Joiner (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2021, No. 21STFL01704). Defendants also move for a protective order regarding pending discovery. Plaintiff Krista Joiner ("Plaintiff") opposes the motions.

ANALYSIS

The Court has the power to "amend and control its process and orders so as to make them conform to law and justice . . .," which includes the power to stay proceedings. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 128, subd. (a)(8); see also Bailey v. Fosca Oil Co. (1963) 216 Cal.App.2d 813, 817-818.)

In the instant case, Plaintiff retained Defendants to manage her business and to provide accounting and tax services in connection with the business Plaintiff co-owned with her former spouse, Alvin Nathaniel Joiner. Plaintiff contends Defendants assisted Plaintiff's former spouse in concealing marital assets from Plaintiff.

As of the filing of these motions, the property division trial in Plaintiff's dissolution action, In re Marriage of Joiner (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2021, No. 21STFL01704), was ongoing. However, the parties have since settled the property division issues and the property division trial was vacated. Accordingly, the motion to stay is moot.

Defendants also seeks a protective order to stay Defendants' obligations to respond to written discovery Plaintiff propounded on Defendants "until thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the property division trial . . . ." (Notice of Motion for Protective Order.) As set forth above, the parties settled the property division issues and the property division trial was vacated. Thus, this motion for protective order has also been rendered moot. Defendants are to give notice of the Court's ruling and to file proof of service of same. | Home -->)" -->