| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
DEMURRER to Amended COMPLAINT
Matter on the Law & Motion/Discovery Calendar for Tuesday, June 10, 2025, line 13, DEFENDANT WONG & ASSOCIATES DEMURRER to Amended COMPLAINT (tentative ruling part 1 of 3)
Pro per plaintiffs Jane Feng and Zhen Zhou bring a second amended complaint (SAC) against their former attorney, Lawrence Wong, sued as Wong & Associates after the court sustained a demurrer to their first amended complaint. The SAC was filed on March 27, 2025. This action was initiated on February 22, 2024. Defendants have filed a demurrer to the SAC in its entirety. For the reasons stated herein, the court overrules the demurrer in part and sustains it in part with a final opportunity to amend.
A demurrer tests the sufficiency of the complaint on its face and "accept[s] the truth of material facts properly pleaded in the operative complaint." (Capito v. San Jose Healthcare System, LP (2024) 17 Cal.5th 273 [internal quotation marks and citation omitted].) The court may also consider facts that are judicially noticeable or have been previously pleaded by the plaintiff; a plaintiff is bound by facts he has pleaded even under a prior version of the complaint. (Smyth v. Berman (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 183, 196.) The court must liberally construe the pleading with a view to substantial justice between the parties. (Thomas v. Regents of University of California (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 587, 605.)
Plaintiffs' first cause of action alleges fraud. They hired defendant Wong to pursue a breach of contract action against their landlord. He took their fee but "failed to put in the work on behalf of the Plaintiffs." (SAC para. 1.) The elements of fraud are "(a) misrepresentation (false representation, concealment, or nondisclosure); (b) knowledge of falsity (or 'scienter'); (c) intent to defraud, i.e., to induce reliance; (d) justifiable reliance; and (e) resulting damage." (Lazar v. Superior Court (1996) 12 Cal.4th 631, 638.)
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?”
The court overrules the demurrer as to this cause of action. Read liberally, the complaint alleges that Wong represented he would perform legal work that he did not perform and an inference a factfinder could draw is that he knew the representation was false and intended to induce Plaintiffs' reliance. Plaintiffs allege damages in the final two paragraphs of the complaint: the amount they paid in fees, and the difference between their previous rent and current rent.
(end of tentative ruling part 1 see part 2) = (302/CVA) = (302/CVA) | |