Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
4 323-219-9591
10
LUXDOT, LLC ) Case No. 10U04067
11 )
) NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND
12 ) DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT
Plaintiff. )
13 )
vs. ) Date of Hearing:
) Time of Hearing:
14
ALMA DELGADO )
) Dept.:
15 Defendants Does 1 to 10 )
)
16 ____________________________________)
17
18 TO ALL PARTIES :
22 Defendant, ALMA DELGADO, Will and here by does move the Court for an
25 1
26
5 1161(2) and further that the Three Day notice was issued to a bona fide
11 hearing of Demurrer.
12
13
15
ALMA DELGADO
16
DEFENDANT, IN PRO PER
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
3
Defendant, ALMA DELGADO (“Defendant”) hereby generally demurs to the
4
unlawful detainer complaint filed by LUXDOT, LLc (“Plaintiff”) on the
5
following grounds;
6
FIRST GROUND FOR DEMURRER
7
1. Defendant generally demurs to the unlawful detainer complaint filed
8
by plaintiff on the grounds that the three day notice alleged in the
9
complaint was issued to a bona fide tenant (post foreclosure) as
10
described in S896, Sec. 702(b) to which a 90 day notice is required,
11
Thus it is Defective and will not support an unlawful detainer action.
12
SECOND GROUND FOR DEMURRER
13
2: Defendant Generally Demurs to the unlawful detainer complaint filed
14
by Plaintiff on the grounds that the Three-day Notice alleged in the
15
complaint was not properly served to the Defendant. The Defendant never
16
received this notice prior to its appearance in the unlawful detainer
17
complaint. Thus it is Defective and will not support an unlawful
18
detainer action. Code of Civil Procedure § 1162
19
20
21
Dated: ________________________ _______________________________
22
23 ALMA DELGADO
25
26
3
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER
4
DEFENDAMT’S DEMURRER IS PROPERLY BEFOR THE COURT a defendant in an
5
unlawful detainer action may demur. C.C.P. § 1170. Although dicta in
6
Delta Imports v Municipal Court, 146 Cal.App.3d.1033 (1983) suggests
7
that a motion to quash is the remedy where a complaint fails to state a
8
cause of action in unlawful detainer, Delta did not overrule prior
9
cases. See Hinman v. Wagnon, 172 Cal. App. 2d 24 (1959), where the
10
court held that a demurrer was proper where the incorporated 3-day
11
notice was defective on its face. The court sustained a dismissal
12
following sustaining the demurer with out leave to amend.
13
The periods for noticing hearing on a demurrer are not stated in
14
the unlawful detainer stautes, so C.C.P. Section 1177 incorporates the
15
regular provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, such as C.C.P.
16
Section 1005 requiring that motions be noticed on 21 day’s notice, plus
17
five days for mailing. Rule 325(b). California Rules of Court,
18
specifies that demurrer shall be in accordance with section 1005. In
19
the absence of anything with in the unlawful detainer statutes setting
20
a shorter time. Demurrers must be noticed on at least 21 or 26 days’
21
notice.
22
1. Defendant Generally Demurs to the unlawful detainer complaint filed
23
by plaintiff on the Grounds that the Three-day Notice alleged in the
24
complaint fails to include specific contact information in the form
25
of a mailing address as required by Code of Civil Procedure § 1161
26
3 5
8 by plaintiff on the grounds that the three day notice alleged in the
12 action. S896, Sec 702(b) “(b) Bona Fide Lease or Tenancy for the
14 fide only if, (1) the mortgagor or the child, spouse, or parent of
15 the mortgagor under the contract is not the tenant;(2) the lease or
18 substantially less than fair market rent for the property or the
20 local subsidy”
26
5 she is absent from his or her place of residence, and from his or
13 such person can be found; and also sending a copy through the mail
17 “1170. On or before the day fixed for his appearance, the defendant
19
20
21
23
ALMA DELGADO
24
DEFENDANT, IN PRO PER
25
26
2 7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26