LouBar, LLC v. U.S. Bank CA6

I. Background

Since this appeal comes to us after the sustaining of a demurrer and the granting of a motion for judgment on the pleadings (collectively, the demurrer ruling), we take the facts from the operative complaint, its exhibits, and matters judicially noticed. (American

2 In its opening brief, LouBar states that it also challenges the trial court’s denial of its motion for a new trial. Its briefs contain no discussion or argument on the subject. We deem any issues with respect to the new trial motion abandoned. (Ellenberger v. Espinosa (1994) 30 Cal.App.4th 943, 948.) 3 Subsequent statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure unless otherwise noted.

2 Airlines, Inc. v. County of San Mateo (1996) 12 Cal.4th 1110, 1118; Stevenson v. Superior Court (1997) 16 Cal.4th 880, 885 (Stevenson); Dodd v. Citizens Bank of Costa Mesa (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1624, 1627 (Dodd).) We accept these facts as true for the limited purpose of determining whether the complaint states a viable cause of action. (Stevenson, at p. 885.) LouBar owns 20 acres of a 56-acre property that has been operated as the Magic Sands Mobile Home Park since the 1960’s. LouBar acquired its present interest…