Ross
Ross v. Creel Printing & Publishing Co.
Opinion
Opinion
Gemello, J.
Plaintiff Daniel C. Ross appeals from a judgment of dismissal following a trial court order sustaining the demurrer of defendant Creel Printing & Publishing Company, Inc., without leave to amend. We affirm the judgment.
Facts and Procedural History
Plaintiff Daniel C. Ross (Ross) filed a verified complaint in the San Francisco Superior Court on March 2, 2001 against defendants Creel Prints ing & Publishing Company, Inc. (Creel), Gary R. Kasufkin, and Does 1 to 10. Plaintiff alleged on information and belief a single cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff alleged that the defendants, “including on information and belief one or more attorneys whose names are not yet known but who acted on behalf of the named defendants, caused to be written” a letter informing plaintiff that certain checks sent to Creel by plaintiff in his capacity as a company CEO had been returned unpaid, and that if plaintiff did not make good on the checks, the matter would be submitted to the Clark County, Nevada, District Attorney for legal action.
Plaintiff further alleged that defendants knew, or disregarded a substantial probability, that sending the letter…