DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26CV-03605·merced·Civil·Unlawful Detainer
Hearing todayAppearance required

Parties’ names withheld

Court Trial

Hearing date
Aug 31, 2026
Department
9
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Ruling

Code, § 818.) Defendant is directed to prepare and submit a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, as required by law and the California Rules of Court.

Demurrer to Complaint

Defendant Grassland Water District’s unopposed general demurrer to the first cause of action on the ground it does not allege sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action for breach of contract is SUSTAINED. It is undisputed that Plaintiff does not allege in the complaint that he is a party to, or a third-party beneficiary of, the alleged contract between Defendant and the U.S. Department of the Interior (see paragraphs 9, 10, and 22 of the complaint) with the necessary standing to sue Defendant for breach of contract.

Defendant’s unopposed general demurrer to the second cause of action for “breach of duty” on the ground it does not allege sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action is SUSTAINED. Breach of duty is an element of the tort of negligence and is not an independently recognized cause of action under California law. Further, all tort causes of action against public entities are based on statute. The Government Claims Act abolishes all common law tort liability against government entities. (Gov. Code, § 815; Leon v. County of Riverside (2023) 14 Cal.5th 910, 918.)

Defendant’s unopposed general demurrer to the third cause of action for negligence on the ground it does not allege sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action is SUSTAINED. Public entities are not subject to common law tort liability.

Defendant’s unopposed general demurrer to the entire complaint on the ground it does not allege sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action is SUSTAINED. As stated above, public entities are not subject to common law tort liability and the complaint does not specifically identify the grounds for statutory liability against Defendant.

Plaintiff has not filed any written opposition indicating how he might amend the complaint to allege sufficient facts to constitute a viable cause of action against Defendant, therefore the general demurrer to the entire complaint and each cause of action is sustained without leave to amend. Defendant is directed to prepare and submit a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, as required by law and the California Rules of Court.

26CV-03605 [Parties’ names withheld pursuant to CCP § 1161.2(a)(1)]

Court Trial: Unlawful Detainer

Appearance required.

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