NATHAN DANIEL LEHMANN VS. SOUSANNA LEE ET AL

SF Superior Court - Law & Motion / Discovery Dept 302 - CGC23609966 - July 2, 2025 Hearing date: July 2, 2025 Case number: CGC23609966 Case title: NATHAN DANIEL LEHMANN VS. SOUSANNA LEE ET AL Case Number: | | CGC23609966 | Case Title: | | NATHAN DANIEL LEHMANN VS. SOUSANNA LEE ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-07-02 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings; Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Defendant Michael B. Lehmanns Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings | Rulings: | | Matter on calendar for Wednesday, July 2, 2025, Line 11, DEFENDANT MICHAEL LEHMANN's Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings.

Defendant Michael B. Lehmann's Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings is GRANTED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Defendant moves for judgment on the pleadings under Code of Civil Procedure section 438. Such a motion "is equivalent to a demurrer" and is governed by the same standard of review. (People ex rel. Harris v. Pac Anchor Transportation, Inc. (2014) 59 Cal.4th 772, 777.)

Defendant here contends Plaintiff has not alleged facts to support any relief against him. The issue, therefore, is, taking the facts properly pleaded and properly noticed as true, does the challenged cause of action necessarily fail to state a cause for relief. (See Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) In assessing whether the complaint states a cause of action, the court accepts all properly pleaded material facts, but not contentions, deductions, or conclusions of fact or law. (Minton v.

Dignity Health (2019), 39 Cal.App.5th 1155, 1161.) "[I]f, on consideration of all facts stated, it appears that plaintiff is entitled to any relief against defendant, the complaint will be held good, though facts may not be clearly stated, or may be intermingled with a statement of other facts irrelevant to cause of action shown, or though plaintiff may demand relief to which he is not entitled under facts alleged." (Augustine v. Trucco (1954) 124 Cal.App.2d 229, 236, quoting Matteson v. Wagoner (1905) 147 Cal. 739, 742.)

Here, giving Plaintiff's complaint a liberal construction, the complaint fails to allege facts to support any relief against Defendant Michael B. Lehmann. The court grants Plaintiff leave to amend. Any First Amended Complaint must be filed no later than 20 days after notice of entry of this order.

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) 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.

Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@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 contestdept302tr@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 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. =(302/JMQ). | |