Marc Trachtman Law wins Demurrer without leave to amend where Plaintiff is victim of violent third-party assault.
Facts: Plaintiff, a young female, completed her work shift at LA Fitness in Beverly Hills. She was jogging home as she neared and then entered an alleyway allegedly owned by our client, Plaintiff was suddenly struck in the back of the head by a brick, causing her to fall face first to the ground. Plaintiff was tragically attacked by a violent psychopath who ultimately was the perpetrator of multiple violent attacks on unsuspecting persons and who was arrested and ultimately convicted for the multiple crimes. Plaintiff alleged the attack occurred over the course of 30 minutes which occurred on both public and private properties. Plaintiff alleged our client allowed transients and criminals to congregate and commit crimes on the premises in the past due to lack of operable lighting and the nature of the secluded nature of the area from the public’s plain view. Marc Trachtman Law (via Marc A. Trachtman, Esq.) engaged in statutory required meet and confer in advance of filing its first Demurrer pleading to the original Complaint. Plaintiff’s counsel response was that he viewed our “attempted demurrer as an endeavor to harass [his] client, create further delay, and increase litigation expenses.” In Plaintiff’s counsel 4-page attack, he concluded that he “demanded that [we] not file this ill-conceived demurrer as it is meritless and a complete waste of time and resources.” “Further given the frivolous nature of [our] proposed demurrer, [Plaintiff’s counsel threatened it] will seek sanctions against [our law firm and our client] pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Sections 128.5 and 128.7 should [we] proceed with the filing of [our Demurrer].”
Result: Marc Trachtman Law (via Marc A. Trachtman, Esq. and John W. Roddy, Esq.) failed to heed Plaintiff’s counsel threats and warnings and proceeded with the Demurrer to the original Complaint based on lack of duty of our client. Not only was Marc Trachtman Law not sanctioned but the court agreed with Marc Trachtman Law and sustained the Demurrer. Plaintiff’s Counsel filed a First Amended Complaint, but Marc Trachtman Law was successful again on getting the Demurrer sustained. Plaintiff further filed a Second Amended Complaint, but Marc Trachtman Law was yet again successful on its Demurrer, but this time, without leave to amend, which put a final end to the action.