Ellenberger
Ellenberger v. Espinosa
Opinion
Opinion
Hollenhorst, J.
Plaintiff, James Dennis Ellenberger, D.D.S., appeals from a judgment entered against him and in favor of defendant Jennie Espinosa, (hereinafter defendant) based on the trial court’s action of sustaining her demurrer to plaintiffs second amended complaint without leave to amend.
Procedural Background
On April 10, 1992, plaintiff filed his second amended complaint against defendant and several other parties, including the State of California. Five causes of action were alleged against defendant: (1) conspiracy to violate his civil rights ( 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ); (2) slander per se; (3) intentional interference with contractual relationships; (4) intentional interference with prospective economic advantage; and (5) conspiracy. On May 14, 1992, defendant demurred to each of these causes of action. On June 26, 1992, plaintiff filed his opposition to the demurrer. The court reviewed defendant’s challenges, sustained the demurrer without leave to amend, and entered judgment in her favor. Plaintiff appeals from such judgment.
Standard of Review
Where a trial court sustains a demurrer without leave to amend, we review such action under the abuse of discretion standard. (Hendy v.…