Case Number: VC063883 Hearing Date: July 01, 2014 Dept: SEC

RICHLINE TEXTILE, INC. v. VPI PACKING, INC.
CASE NO.: VC063883
HEARING: 07/01/14

#8
TENTATIVE ORDER

I. Defendant JADE APPAREL, INC.’s demurrer is ORDERED OFF
CALENDAR, at counsel’s request.

II. Defendant VPI PACKING, INC.’s demurrer is OVERRULED as
to the breach of contract cause of action; and SUSTAINED WITHOUT
LEAVE TO AMEND as to the conversion and unjust enrichment
causes of action. C.C.P. § 430.10(e), (f).

III. Defendant VPI PACKING, INC.’s motion to strike the claims for
punitive damages and attorney’s fees is GRANTED. C.C.P. §§ 435,
436.

Defendant VPI has 20 days to serve and file a responsive pleading.

Plaintiff RICHLINE TEXTILE, INC. allegedly supplied defendants with fabric for which they failed to pay, and asserts several causes of action arising from those facts. Defendant VPI demurs to the breach of contract, conversion and unjust enrichment causes of action.

Defendant demurs to the breach of contract claim on the ground that the essential terms of the purchase orders are not set forth. The invoices are attached to the pleading, and presumably set forth the obligations of the parties with respect to the subject transactions. Comp., Exh. A. Plaintiff alleges performance. Comp., ¶10. The nature of the breach (i.e. nonpayment) is evident from the pleading. The demurrer is overruled.

Plaintiff has not, however, stated a cause of action for conversion. The factual allegations support a breach of contract, but not tort recovery. See Erlich v. Menezes (1999) 21 Cal.4th 543. That defendants allegedly failed to return good after nonpayment is not a breach of an independent legal duty, but of an obligation arising from the contract itself. The demurrer is sustained.

The demurrer is also sustained with respect to the cause of action for unjust enrichment. “Unjust enrichment” is a general principle, not a cause of action. Melchoir v. New Line Productions, Inc. (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 779.

There appears to be no reasonable possibility of amending either the conversion or unjust enrichment claims. Plaintiff did not file opposition to the demurrer. As to the 5th and 7th causes of action, the demurrer is sustained without leave to amend.

The motion to strike the claims for attorney’s fees and punitive damages is granted without leave to amend. Punitive damages are not recoverable in a breach of contract action. Applied Equipment Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd. (1994) 7 Cal.4th 503.

Plaintiff has not alleged a contractual or statutory basis for attorney’s fees, so the request for recovery of fees is also stricken.

To the extend defendant seeks an order striking “improper allegations and demands for inconsistent allegations and remedies,” the motion was not properly noticed. C.R.C. 3.1322. To the extent the reference is to the damages sought in connection with the conversion claim, it is moot since the demurrer thereto was sustained.