Loomis

Loomis v. Murphy

Good Law
1990 Cal. App. LEXIS 66·217 Cal. App. 3d 589·266 Cal. Rptr. 82
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 26, 1990A045541California2,027 words

Opinion

Opinion

Merrill, J.

Following the dismissal of his underlying complaint, Joseph Michael Murphy moved for judgment on the pleadings as to the first amended cross-complaint (hereinafter cross-complaint) filed by Andrew French Loomis and Chul Ki Kim. The trial court granted the motion and entered judgment on the cross-complaint in favor of Murphy. Loomis and Kim appeal.

I

A motion for judgment on the pleadings, analogous to a general demurrer, challenges the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s (here cross-complainant’s) cause of action. The motion is confined to the face of the pleading under attack. It admits all material and issuable facts pleaded and the issue is whether a cause of action has been stated. (Fosgate v. Gonzales (1980) 107 Cal.App.3d 951, 957 [ 166 Cal.Rptr. 233 ]; Tiffany v. Sierra Sands Unified School Dist. (1980) 103 Cal.App.3d 218, 225 [ 162 Cal.Rptr. 669 ].)

According to the cross-complaint, Murphy filed the complaint in this action without an honest belief in its validity and for an ulterior and improper purpose. The cross-complaint alleged that Murphy filed the complaint maliciously and with the intent to damage Loomis and Kim by gaining advantage in another lawsuit, Kim…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.