Miller v. Novotney CA2/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 3, 2022B305609California5,855 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW

In reviewing a judgment of dismissal after a demurrer “ ‘we must assume the truth of all facts properly pleaded by the plaintiffs, as well as those that are judicially noticeable.’ ” (Small v. Fritz Companies, Inc. (2003) 30 Cal.4th 167, 171.) We may consider such facts, as well as those that may be reasonably implied or inferred therefrom. (See Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318

2 (Blank); Young v. Gannon (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 209, 220 (Young); Code Civ. Proc., § 430.30.) We may not consider contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law. (Zelig v. County of Los Angeles (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1112, 1126 (Zelig).) Accordingly, the following factual background summary is based solely on the operative complaint and those documents of which judicial notice has been taken, accepting as true all properly pleaded factual allegations and facts reasonably inferred therefrom.

A. Alleged Factual Basis for Miller’s Lawsuit In 1997, Miller was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The jury also found true allegations that Miller had suffered convictions for kidnapping and robbery in 1980, rendering his 1997 conviction a third strike…

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.