Tentative Ruling: Shomari McLemore v. Covenant Living Communities and Services
Case Number
25CV05870
Case Type
Hearing Date / Time
Wed, 04/08/2026 - 10:00
Nature of Proceedings
1) Demurrer of Defendant to Complaint; 2) Motion of Defendant to Strike Portions of Complaint
Tentative Ruling
For Plaintiff Shomari McLemore: Christine M. Adams, Adams Law
For Defendant Covenant Living Communities and Services: Hugh S. Spackman, Maureen E. Clark, Clinkenbeard, Ramsey, Spackman & Clark, LLP
RULING
For the reasons set forth herein, the demurrer and motion to strike are ordered off calendar. Defendant Covenant Living Communities and Services shall file and serve its responsive pleading on or before April 23, 2026.
Analysis
On September 19, 2025, Plaintiff Shomari McLemore filed the original complaint in this action against Defendant Covenant Living Communities and Services (Covenant Living). On December 8, 2025, without any response having been filed to the original complaint, McLemore filed a first amended complaint (FAC).
On January 15, 2026, Covenant Living filed a demurrer and motion to strike as to the FAC.
“The demurring party shall file and serve with the demurrer a declaration stating either of the following:
“(A) The means by which the demurring party met and conferred with the party who filed the pleading subject to demurrer, and that the parties did not reach an agreement resolving the objections raised in the demurrer.
“(B) That the party who filed the pleading subject to demurrer failed to respond to the meet and confer request of the demurring party or otherwise failed to meet and confer in good faith.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.41, subd. (a)(3); accord, § 435.5, subd. (a)(3) [motion to strike].)
Covenant Living has failed to file and serve a declaration with either the demurrer or motion to strike attesting to the meet and confer requirement of sections 430.41 and 435.5. Instead, the notice of motion in both cases contains the unsworn statement that “Defense counsel met and conferred with Plaintiff’s counsel on January 13, 2026 regarding the issues set forth in this demurrer prior to filing this demurrer. In response, Plaintiff’s counsel indicated that Plaintiff would be standing on the first amended complaint and had no intent to amend. As a result, this demurrer followed.” (Demurrer Notice, at p. 2; accord, Motion to Strike Notice, at p. 2.) Putting aside the fact that the statement does not comply with the requirements of sections 430.41, subdivision (a)(3)(A), and 435.5, subdivision (a)(3)(A) in failing to state the means of the meet and confer, the statement is not in the form of a declaration. A declaration requires a certification under penalty of perjury to be effective. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2015.5; see Safieddine v. MBC FZ, LLC (2024) 103 Cal.App.5th 1086, 1094 [“A declaration not signed under penalty of perjury under the laws of California has ‘no evidentiary value’ and can be disregarded.”].)
The Court will therefore order the hearing on the demurrer and motion to strike off calendar for failing to comply with the requirements of sections 430.41 and 435.5.