Hamilton

Hamilton v. Carr CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 11, 2014F068413California2,494 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

I. Standard of Review

“On appeal from a dismissal after an order sustaining a demurrer, we review the order de novo, exercising our independent judgment about whether the complaint states a cause of action as a matter of law. [Citations.] We give the complaint a reasonable interpretation, reading it as a whole and viewing its parts in context. [Citations.]” (Lazar v. Hertz Corp. (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 1494, 1501.) “‘We treat the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law. [Citation.]’” (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) “‘We do not review the reasons for the trial court’s ruling; if it is correct on any theory, even one not mentioned by the court, and even if the court made its ruling for the wrong reason, it will be affirmed. [Citations.]’ [Citation.]” (Curcini v. County of Alameda (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 629, 637-638 (Curcini).)

Plaintiff filed a request for judicial notice of two documents. The request contained no explanation of the relevance of the documents to the issues on appeal. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.252(a)(2)(A).) Judicial notice may be taken…

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.