Mulholland Security Centers, LLC v. Lepe

Thus, the Court sustains the demurrer as to the fourth cause of action. Leave to Amend Leave to amend must be allowed where there is a reasonable possibility of successful amendment. (See Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349 [court shall not "sustain a demurrer without leave to amend if there is any reasonable possibility that the defect can be cured by amendment"]; Kong v. City of Hawaiian Gardens Redevelopment Agency (2002) 108 Cal.App.4th 1028, 1037 ["A demurrer should not be sustained without leave to amend if the complaint, liberally construed, can state a cause of action under any theory or if there is a reasonable possibility the defect can be cured by amendment."]; Vaccaro v.

Kaiman (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 761, 768 ["When the defect which justifies striking a complaint is capable of cure, the court should allow leave to amend."].) The burden is on the complainant to show the Court that the pleading can be successfully amended. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) The Court finds that Prime has not met its burden of showing the Court that the pleading can be amended. This is the second demurrer on Prime's pleading, and Prime failed to address the previous defects that the Court previously raised.

Conclusion

West Valley Medical Partners, LLC's demurrer is sustained as to the first, second, third, and fourth causes of action without leave to amend.

DEFAULT JUDGMENT Case Name: Mulholland Security Centers, LLC v. Lepe Case Number: 25STCV23864 Date: August 20, 2026 Defendant(s) Against Whom Default Judgment is Sought: Defendant Christian Lepe DENIED. Plaintiff's request for damages in the amount of $25,234.02 exceeds the amount sought in the operative pleading. (Compl., 6:13-20.) Plaintiff filed a statement of damages; however, the damages Plaintiff seeks to recover are not for a personal injury or wrongful death. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 425.11, subd. (b).)

Thus, the amount requested in damages is improper. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 580.) Plaintiff also seeks interest at the rate of 10%, which is improper because Plaintiff has not presented the Court with authority that it seeks that rate. Case Number: 25STCV37806 Hearing Date: August 20, 2026 Dept: 516 Judge James I. Montgomery Department 516 Hearing Date: August 20, 2026 Case Name: Dominguez, et al. v. FCA US, LLC, et al.