Daire

Daire v. Selene Finance CA2/5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 21, 2015B255107California1,019 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

“A demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the factual allegations in a complaint. We independently review the sustaining of a demurrer and determine de novo whether the complaint alleges facts sufficient to state a cause of action or discloses a complete defense. (McCall v. PacifiCare of Cal., Inc. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 412, 415.) We assume the truth of the properly pleaded factual allegations, facts that reasonably can be inferred from those expressly pleaded and matters of which judicial notice has been taken. (Schifando v. City of Los Angeles (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1074, 1081.) We construe the pleading in a reasonable manner and read the allegations in context. (Ibid.) We must affirm the judgment if the sustaining of a general demurrer was proper on any of the grounds stated in the demurrer, regardless of the trial court's stated reasons. (Aubry v. Tri–City Hospital Dist. (1992) 2 Cal.4th 962, 967.)” (Siliga v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 75, 81 (Siliga).) Plaintiff’s appeal is addressed solely to the trial court’s order sustaining defendants’ demurrer to his “third cause of action to void or cancel assignment of deed of…

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.