Bedi

Bedi v. McMullan

Caution
160 Cal. App. 3d 272·1984 Cal. App. LEXIS 2540·206 Cal. Rptr. 578
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 1984B001151California1,613 words

Opinion

Opinion

Johnson, J.

Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment dismissing their complaint for forcible entry and detainer following the sustaining of defendants’ demurrer without leave to amend. We reverse.

Facts and Proceeding Below

For purposes of this appeal we accept as true the properly pleaded factual allegations of the complaint. (Thompson v. County of Alameda (1980) 27 Cal.3d 741, 746 [ 167 Cal.Rptr. 70 , 614 P.2d 728 , 12 A.L.R.4th 701 ].) The allegations must be liberally construed with a view to attaining substantial justice among the parties. (Code Civ. Proc., § 452; King v. Central Bank (1977) 18 Cal.3d 840, 843 [ 135 Cal.Rptr. 771 , 558 P.2d 857 ].) Furthermore, the respondents failed to file a brief. Consequently, we accept the facts stated in appellant’s brief as true. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 17(b).)

The complaint seeks to impose liability upon landowners, the McMullans, their attorney, his law firm, and his secretary, for forcible entry and detainer of residential property in the peaceful possession of the Bedi family.

The Bedis allege defendant Robert McMullan appeared at their home one morning accompanied by two uniformed deputies of the Los Angeles County Marshal. The…

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.