DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25STLC09462·la·Civil·Civil
Hearing in about 2 hoursCONTINUED

Solomon v. Angeleno Homes LLC

Demurrer to First Amended Complaint

Hearing date
Aug 25, 2026
Department
514
Judge
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Demurrer rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffSolomon
DefendantAngeleno Homes LLC
DefendantMelinna Rivera

Ruling

(Stanley Mosk Courthouse: Dept. 514) August 25, 2026 DEPARTMENT 514 LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

Demurrer to First Amended Complaint Tentative Ruling Defendant Melinna Rivera demurs to the First Amended Complaint filed in this action on April 1, 2026 (the "FAC"). In her demurrer, Defendant presents evidence that the FAC is "identical" to a first amended complaint filed in Case No. 23STCV24047, also involving these same parties. That case was dismissed in November 2025, approximately one more before this action was filed. It appears to the Court that this matter may be related, within the meaning of California Rules of Court, rule 3.300, to Case No. 23STCV24047.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Defendant's counsel to file a Notice of Related Case by no later than September 1, 2026, identifying this case and Case No. 23STCV24047 as related cases. Strict and full compliance with subdivisions (c) and (d) of rule 3.300 is required. The Court expresses no views on whether the two cases should be ordered related. That decision is entrusted to the judge presiding in the department in which Case No. 23STCV24047 is (or was) pending. The Court CONTINUES the hearing on the demurrer for approximately 60 days.

The Court also CONTINUES the Case Management Conference and Order to Show Cause hearing, currently set for September 10, to the same date and time as the new demurrer hearing. Moving party is ordered to give notice. | Home -->)" -->

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share