Campanelli

Campanelli v. Regents of University of California

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 326·44 Cal. App. 4th 572·51 Cal. Rptr. 2d 891·96 Daily Journal DAR 4305·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2636
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 11, 1996A068857California2,944 words

Opinion

Opinion

Smith, J.

Appellant Louis P. Campanelli appeals from a judgment in favor of defendants-respondents, The Regents of University of California (The Regents), Robert L. Bockrath and Daniel Boggan, after the court sustained respondents’ demurrer without leave to amend in his action for defamation. We agree with the trial court that the alleged defamatory remarks were nonactionable statements of opinion, and affirm.

Background

As this case comes before us after the sustaining of a demurrer, we are guided by the following principles: “ ‘We treat the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law. [Citation.] . . .’ Further, we give the complaint a reasonable interpretation, reading it as a whole and its parts in their context. [Citation.] . . . And when it is sustained without leave to amend, we decide whether there is a reasonable possibility that the defect can be cured by amendment: if it can be, the trial court has abused its discretion and we reverse; if not, there has been no abuse of discretion and we affirm. [Citations.]” (Blanks. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318 [ 216 Cal.Rptr. 718 , 703 P.2d 58 ].) We…

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.