Hayter Trucking, Inc. v. Shell Western E & P, Inc.

Good Law
18 Cal. App. 4th 1·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 876·22 Cal. Rptr. 2d 229·93 Daily Journal DAR 10978·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6422
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 25, 1993F016359California5,499 words

Opinion

Opinion

Martin, J.

Plaintiff transportation firm appeals from a defense judgment in an action for termination of a contract for vacuum truck services.

Statement of the Case

On January 31, 1991, plaintiff filed a complaint for breach of written contract, naming Shell Western E&P, Inc., and 50 Does as defendants and praying for compensatory damages according to proof. Defendant Shell Western demurred to the complaint on the grounds it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.20, subd. (a)) and, after a contested hearing, the trial court sustained defendant’s demurrer with 20 days leave to amend.

On April 18, 1991, plaintiff filed a first amended complaint for breach of written contract. The first amended complaint pleaded the same cause of action but in greater detail. Defendant again demurred, alleging the pleading did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

On June 4, 1991, the court conducted a contested hearing and sustained the demurrer without leave to amend, and on June 11, 1991, the court filed a formal order on demurrer to the first amended complaint.

On or about June 14, 1991, plaintiff moved for reconsideration…

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.