DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CVPS2508467·riverside·Probate·Quiet Title
Hearing 3 months agoDemurrer: Sustained. Motion to Strike: Granted.

CHASE VS SPENCE

Demurrer on 1st Amended Complaint for Quiet Title; Motion to Strike 1st Amended Complaint for Quiet Title

Hearing date
Jun 10, 2026
Department
PS2
Judge
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Demurrer rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Parties

PlaintiffMarvin H Chase
DefendantThomas L Spence
DefendantCatherine C Spence

Ruling

Defendant has not weighed in on his position as to the status of his receipt of the responses. To the contrary, Plaintiff’s counsel has demonstrated the responses were timely served, and subsequently were re-served. As a result, this motion is moot.

2. CASE # CASE NAME HEARING NAME DEMURRER ON 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR QUIET TITLE OF CVPS2508467 CHASE VS SPENCE MARVIN H CHASE BY THOMAS L SPENCE, CATHERINE C SPENCE Tentative Ruling: Sustained.

No opposition filed.

Plaintiff granted leave one additional time to file a 2nd Amended Complaint within 10 days of this order becoming final.

Moving party to provide notice pursuant to CCP 1019.5.

3. CASE # CASE NAME HEARING NAME MOTION TO STRIKE 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR QUIET TITLE OF CVPS2508467 CHASE VS SPENCE MARVIN H CHASE BY THOMAS L SPENCE, CATHERINE C SPENCE Tentative Ruling: Granted.

No opposition filed.

Paragraph 47, Prayer for Relief “e,” and Prayer for Relief “f” punitive damages and injunctive relief are stricken from the 1st Amended Complaint.

Plaintiff granted leave one additional time to file a 2nd Amended Complaint within 10 days of this order becoming final.

Moving party to provide notice pursuant to CCP 1019.5.

4. CASE # CASE NAME HEARING NAME MOTION FOR ORDER FOR COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CVPS2509945 PREJUDGMENT POSSESSION BY VS TA L.P. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Tentative Ruling: Hearing taken off calendar by stipulation and order filed April 29, 2026.

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