File new demurrer after filing deadline if amended complaint moots existing demurrer?

[Frankh]

Jurisdiction

California

The court sustained my demurrer to complaint in a prior unlawful detainer lawsuit. Plaintiff refiled. Once again, I filed a demurrer. Subsequently, when I checked the court case file, I discovered that plaintiff had filed an amended complaint. There was an attached proof of service; it indicated service by mail. But I didn't receive that amended complaint; it was allegedly mailed to my post office box. The five-day period to respond to the amended complaint has expired.
I believe that the amended complaint effectively mooted my existing demurrer.

Given my pre-existing demurrer, if I file a demurrer to the amended complaint, will the judge regard it as being untimely?

If a second demurrer can be heard, then, when can I take existing demurrer matter off calendar, without risk of default judgment, i.e. notwithstanding a newly filed demurrer?

The three amendments to the complaint are not substantive changes (i.e., changes in material allegations). Except for placing checkmarks in two of the form complaint's items (which contributed no new information), the amended complaint is an EXACT duplicate of the original complaint.
The handwritten information in the verification sections of both complaints are perfect images of one another, as seen when one overlays and lines up their respective pages. (Yes, even the dates are the same.) It is apparent that plaintiff did not actually write his signature on the amended complaint.
CCP § 1166 (a) (1) expressly requires the verification of unlawful detainer complaints.

Is simply utilizing a copy of the entire verification section of the original complaint as the verification section of an amended complaint regarded as a good-faith effort to substantially comply with that statute?

Also, in the case file, I noticed that there were several unsuccessful requests for both the entry of default judgment and also to set case for trial. Each of those requests had proof of service documents filled out; they indicated service by mail. I never received copies of any of those requests.
Fortunately, the court clerk had denied all such requests, with reason being that a date for hearing on the demurrer had been set. The file indicates that the" submission for default and judgment pending" and "request for default filed and not entered.

I have looked at CCP §§ 471.5 and 585, which seem to mean that, although I failed to timely file a responsive pleading to amended complaint, no default entry can be made because I had timely filed a demurrer to the original complaint.

 

[army judge]

There is no way anyone can guess what the outcome will be from any legal pleading or matter before a trial court.

I stopped guessing decades ago.

All I ever suggest is do your best, and allow the court to decide.

My overall advice to every client, and potential client, stay out of the courtroom, IF YOU CAN.

You might find the information in this blog useful:

Demurrer to complaint in California

 

[Frankh]

There is no way anyone can guess what the outcome will be from any legal pleading or matter before a trial court.

I stopped guessing decades ago.

All I ever suggest is do your best, and allow the court to decide.

My overall advice to every client, and potential client, stay out of the courtroom, IF YOU CAN.

You might find the information in this blog useful:

Demurrer to complaint in California

Thanks for the hype! Unfortunately, the hyperlink is not functioning; it may be the way it is embedded within your post. So, I am unable to utilize it. But, the title sounds like a Burman blog, as I have read his insightful blog regarding defaults, demurrers, jurisdiction, etc. He is ever so prolific; the man is like a machine

I am relatively well informed concerning demurrers in respect of statutes and case law. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find "on-point" info for cases where a untimely demurred is filed after the amended complaint effectively renders a prior timely filed demurrer moot.

I do also realize that courts abhor a default, just as nature abhors a vacuum. Accordingly, courts strive to have cases resolved on their merits. If the judge ultimately does refuse a hearing on my second demurrer, then a default judgment will surely be entered.

Consequently, I would just move to have that particular judgment set aside; and, I am substantially certain that I would prevail with such a motion. So, ultimately it would be wasting court resources. I would suppose that a relatively high percentage of defaults (involving any procedural situations somewhat similar to mine) are set aside.

I understand not being overly optimistic, or seeking to avoid giving educational information based on too little or missing information, or even not desiring to tread into territory that would necessitate application of extremely complex legal strategy and maneuvering on the part of the average layman.

That said... With all due respect, I hardly think that most courts, within a given jurisdictions, make procedural rulings involving certain patterns of non-complex scenarios in an unpredictable manner.

I have succinctly highlighted the procedural history of my case, thus far. Moreover, I am substantially certain that most experienced attorneys could predict the probable ruling by an average judge within their state, given a procedural scenario comparable to mine. Moreover, such predictions would statistically be shown to have a relatively high degree of certainty (i.e. acceptably low degree of error).

 

[army judge]

Thanks for the hype! Unfortunately, the hyperlink is not functioning; it may be the way it is embedded within your post. So, I am unable to utilize it. But, the title sounds like a Burman blog, as I have read his insightful blog regarding defaults, demurrers, jurisdiction, etc. He is ever so prolific; the man is like a machine

I am relatively well informed concerning demurrers in respect of statutes and case law. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find "on-point" info for cases where a untimely demurred is filed after the amended complaint effectively renders a prior timely filed demurrer moot.

I do also realize that courts abhor a default, just as nature abhors a vacuum. Accordingly, courts strive to have cases resolved on their merits. If the judge ultimately does refuse a hearing on my second demurrer, then a default judgment will surely be entered.

Consequently, I would just move to have that particular judgment set aside; and, I am substantially certain that I would prevail with such a motion. So, ultimately it would be wasting court resources. I would suppose that a relatively high percentage of defaults (involving any procedural situations somewhat similar to mine) are set aside.

I understand not being overly optimistic, or seeking to avoid giving educational information based on too little or missing information, or even not desiring to tread into territory that would necessitate application of extremely complex legal strategy and maneuvering on the part of the average layman.

That said... With all due respect, I hardly think that most courts, within a given jurisdictions, make procedural rulings involving certain patterns of non-complex scenarios in an unpredictable manner.

I have succinctly highlighted the procedural history of my case, thus far. Moreover, I am substantially certain that most experienced attorneys could predict the probable ruling by an average judge within their state, given a procedural scenario comparable to mine. Moreover, such predictions would statistically be shown to have a relatively high degree of certainty (i.e. acceptably low degree of error).

Its working, I just used it from THREE different devices.

Yes, I could predict, but why bother?

I have my law degree, and my licensure in several states and before the federal bar.

I need prove or illustrate nothing to you, citizen.

You laid it all out as you see it, so again, GOOD LUCK.



Here it is again:

Demurrer to complaint in California

You're also FREE to Google it yourself, look for "demurrer in CA civil cases"