Carlton

Carlton v. Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, Inc.

Good Law
175 Cal. Rptr. 3d 909·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 732·228 Cal. App. 4th 1200·2014 WL 3955885
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 14, 2014E056566California3,770 words

Opinion

Opinion

Miller, J.

— In a second amended complaint (SAC), plaintiff and appellant

Scott Carlton (Carlton) sued defendants and respondents (1) Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, Inc. (Dr. Pepper); (2) Mott’s LP (Mott’s); (3) Larry D. Young (Young); (4) Caesar Vargas (Vargas); and (5) Graham Bailey (Bailey). The causes of action included (a) wrongful termination against Dr. Pepper and Mott’s; (b) sex discrimination against all defendants; and (c) breach of contract against Dr. Pepper and Mott’s. The trial court sustained, without leave to amend, the demurrer of Dr. Pepper, Vargas, Bailey, and Mott’s. The trial court also sanctioned Carlton and his trial counsel jointly and severally in the amount of $1,360 due to Carlton’s “wholly unjustified” interrogatory responses.

The only respondent on appeal is Dr. Pepper; the other defendants are not respondents in this appeal. Carlton contends the trial court erred by granting the demurrer because the demurrer was untimely. Next, Carlton asserts the demurrer improperly included the breach of contract cause of action, and therefore the trial court erred by sustaining the demurrer on that cause of action. Lastly, Carlton contends the trial court erred by…

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.