Pauletto

Pauletto v. Reliance Insurance

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 503·64 Cal. App. 4th 597·75 Cal. Rptr. 2d 334·98 Daily Journal DAR 5920·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4350
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 5, 1998D026953California3,723 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Neill, J.

Louie Pauletto and Dorothy E. Pauletto filed a complaint for malicious prosecution and abuse of process against Reliance Insurance Company (Reliance), United Pacific Insurance Company (United Pacific) and the law firm of Booth, Mitchell & Strange (collectively defendants). The complaint was based on defendants’ institution of proceedings in federal bankruptcy court to contest the dischargeability of a debt the Paulettos owed to Reliance and United Pacific. The Paulettos appeal a judgment entered against them after the court sustained defendants’ demurrer to the complaint without leave to amend on the ground their causes of action are preempted by federal bankruptcy law. We affirm.

Factual and Procedural Background

Because this is an appeal from a judgment of dismissal entered after the sustaining of a general demurrer, “. . .we accept as true all the material allegations of the complaint.” (Shoemaker v. Myers (1990) 52 Cal.3d 1, 7 [ 276 Cal.Rptr. 303 , 801 P.2d 1054 , 20 A.L.R.Sth 1016].) The Paulettos’ complaint discloses the following facts.

The Paulettos were the sole owners and shareholders of Louetto Construction Company, Inc. (Louetto), a general contractor in…

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.