Thomas

Thomas v. Treisman CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 19, 2015F068936California1,037 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

Appellate review of a judgment sustaining a demurrer entails a de novo examination of the complaint to determine whether the facts alleged were sufficient to state a cause of action under any legal theory. (Protect Agricultural Land v. Stanislaus County Local Agency Formation Com. (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 550, 557.) For this purpose, we “accept as true the properly pleaded material factual allegations of the complaint, together with facts that may properly be judicially noticed.” (Crowley v. Katleman (1994) 8 Cal.4th 666, 672; see Esparza v. County of Los Angeles (2014) 224 Cal.App.4th 452, 459 [“‘Where the complaint’s allegations or judicially noticeable facts reveal the existence of an affirmative defense, the “plaintiff must ‘plead around’ the defense, by alleging specific facts that would avoid the apparent defense.”’”].) On appeal, the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that the superior court erred in

Appellant raised a Bivens claim, inter alia. (See generally 42 U.S.C. § 1983; Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents (1971) 403 U.S. 388.)

2. sustaining the demurrer. (Brown v. Crandall (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 1, 8; Vaughn v. LJ Internat., Inc.…

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.