DC Auto v. Superior Court CA4/2

INTRODUCTION

In this matter we have reviewed the petition and the opposition filed by real party

in interest. We have determined that resolution of the matter involves the application of

settled principles of law, and that issuance of a peremptory writ in the first instance is

therefore appropriate. (Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171,

178.)

DISCUSSION

In our view, the fifth cause of action contains severable claims which have been

pleaded separately, and Lilienthal & Fowler v. Superior Court (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th

1848 controls this case. A party cannot prevent the adjudication of factually separate

claims simply by including them in what is pleaded as a single “cause of action.” (See

also Edward Fineman Co. v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1110.) Although real

party in interest argues that amendments to Code of Civil Procedure section 437c,

subdivision (f)(1) only allows a motion for summary judgment to be heard if it

“completely disposes of a cause of action,” the court in Edward Fineman Co. dealt with

this same language and for policy reasons, with which we agree, applied Lilienthal &

Fowler. We also disagree that petitioner was…