| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
DEFENDANT MICHAEL LUCHI'S DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT
Matter on the Law & Motion / Discovery calendar for Thursday, September 4, 2025, Line 11 [Part 2 of 2 of the tentative ruling]. DEFENDANT MICHAEL LUCHI'S DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT.
The demurrer to cause of action four for Elder Abuse is overruled. Welfare & Institutions Code section 15610.07(a)(1) states: "'Abuse of an elder or a dependent adult'" means any of the following: (1) Physical abuse, neglect, abandonment, isolation, abduction, or other treatment with resulting physical harm or pain or mental suffering." (emphasis added.) (See also Darrin v. Miller (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 450, 454-455[neighbor harassing elderly plaintiff committed "other treatment" that constituted elder abuse]; Welfare & Institutions Code section 15610.53 [defining "mental suffering"].) As with the other claims, defendant raises a factual issue.
The demurrer to cause of action five for negligent infliction of emotional distress ("NIED") is overruled. Defendant is correct that NIED is not a stand-alone cause of action, but really a claim for "negligence." (Burgess v. Superior Court (1992) 2 Cal.4th 1064, 1072.) The court construes the claim as one for negligence and overrules since plaintiffs allege sufficient ultimate facts to support the claim.
The demurrer to the "cause of action" for civil conspiracy is overruled. Defendant is correct that civil conspiracy is not a cause of action. (Applied Equipment Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd. (1994) 7 Cal.4th 503, 510-511.) Plaintiffs, however, allege an underlying wrong/tort and the court will treat the conspiracy allegations as general charging allegations.
The Law & Motion Department has heard two motions in this case but it now appears clear that this action arises out of the possession and use of real property. Pursuant to San Francisco Local Rule 8.2(A)(1), subsequent law and motion matters in this case should be filed in Department 501.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept301tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.
Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept301tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion or Discovery Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address.
[End of part 2 of 2 of the tentative ruling.] =(301/CVA)