Lapique v. Ruef
This text of 158 P. 339 (Lapique v. Ruef) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This is an appeal upon the judgment-roll from an order entered in favor of the defendants Le Breton and Oliver sustaining their respective demurrers to the plaintiff’s second amended complaint, and from a judgment entered thereon. The demurrers assailed the complaint as a whole and the twenty alleged causes of action attempted to be pleaded therein, upon the ground, among others, of uncertainty and ambiguity.
*392 The demurrers upon the grounds stated were well taken, for the reason that it cannot be determined from the allegations of said second amended complaint whether plaintiff’s causes of action were founded upon alleged injuries to his person, his property, or his character, or upon an injury to the property of one Jean Louis Ader. This complaint was ambiguous and uncertain in the further particular that it cannot be ascertained therefrom whether the acts complained of were committed by the defendants in their individual capacity, or in one of the other capacities in which they are alleged to have acted. The demurrers having been properly sustained upon the ground stated and in the particulars pointed out, it will not be necessary for us to discuss the other grounds of demurrer.
The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
158 P. 339, 30 Cal. App. 391, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 28, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lapique-v-ruef-calctapp-1916.