Case Number: BC687921 Hearing Date: April 06, 2018 Dept: 32

BARBARA STUART ROBINSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNION RESCUE MISSION, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC687921

Hearing Date: April 6, 2018

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

(1) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (“osc”) re: dismissal

(2) Demurrer

BACKGROUND

On December 29, 2017, Plaintiff Barbara Robinson (“Robinson”) filed an unlimited jurisdiction civil law case alleging tortious acts, including but not limited to intimidation from all seven (7) defendants. Defendant Union Rescue Mission (“UMR”) filed a Demurrer to Complaint on the grounds that Complaint does not allege sufficient facts to state any valid cause of action against UMR.

It has come to the Court’s attention that Plaintiff Robinson was declared a vexatious litigant on March 13, 2012 in Los Angeles Superior Court case NC056093. To date, Plaintiff has not fulfilled her prefiling requirement pursuant to CCP § 391.7.

DISCUSSION

A. Order to Show Cause (“OSC”) re: Dismissal and Dismissal of Case

Plaintiff Robinson filed this unlimited jurisdiction civil law case BC687921 in propria persona without first obtaining a prefiling order pursuant to CCP § 391.7. Under CCP § 391.7(c), litigation that was improperly commenced in propria persona by a plaintiff subject to a prefiling order remains subject to dismissal at any point in its pendency, not only at the early stages. (Shalant v. Girardi (2011) 51 Cal.4th 1164, 1172-73). Thus, a vexatious litigant, who – although subject to a prefiling order – nevertheless files an improper in propria persona lawsuit, faces the possibility that the lawsuit will be dismissed pursuant to CCP § 391.7(c), regardless of the impact that a dismissal will have on the vexatious litigant. (Kovacevic v. Avalon at Eagles’ Crossing Homeowners Assn. (2010) 189 Cal.App.4th 677, 686-87).

On March 2, 2018, Judge Weintraub of Dept. 1 of this court, automatically stayed this action and advised Robinson that her claims in this case were subject to automatic dismissal unless Robinson obtains a prefiling order within 10 days. (CCP § 391.7(c)). (See, Minute order of March 2, 2018.)

Robinson has not obtain a prefiling order. As such, her action is dismissed.

B. Demurrer.

A demurrer challenges only the legal sufficiency of the complaint, not the truth of its factual allegations or the plaintiff’s ability to prove those allegations. (Picton v. Anderson Union High Sch. Dist. (1996) 50 Cal. App. 4th 726, 732.) The court must treat as true all of the complaint’s material factual allegations, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law. (Id. at 732–33.) The complaint is to be construed liberally to determine whether a cause of action has been stated. (Id. at 733.)

Based upon the court’s ruling on the OSC Re Dismissal, defendants demurrer is moot.

C. Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, Robinson’s complaint is DISMISSED, and Defendants’ Demurrer is moot.