Case Number: TC028998 Hearing Date: March 22, 2018 Dept: A

# 11. Paul Logan III v. Hyrecar Inc., et al.

Case No.: TC028998

Matter on calendar for: Hearing on demurrer

Tentative ruling:

Self-represented Plaintiff Paul Logan III asserts four causes of action, against Defendants Hyrecar Inc. and Pacesetter National Corp., alleging (1) breach of contract, (2) breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, (3) fraud, and (4) professional negligence. Plaintiff asserts only the second through fourth causes of action against Pacesetter. Pacesetter demurs to the second and third causes of action only.

Plaintiff alleges that:

· He worked as an independent contractor for Hyrecar and rented his vehicles through Hyrecar’s car sharing platform;

· One of Plaintiff’s cars was embezzled through the platform;

· Plaintiff requested an appraisal report from Hyrecar’s third party administrator: Pacesetter, who offered Plaintiff $17,000 cash value for the vehicle without showing documentation of how Pacesetter arrived at this figure;

· The $17,000 offer was “willfully intended to lowball Plaintiff”;

· Plaintiff received an independent appraisal from West Coast Auto Appraisals for $21,232;

· Plaintiff used this new appraisal to try to negotiate a settlement with Pacesetter for $19,875;

· This negotiation was unsuccessful; and

· Pacesetter acted with fraud and bad faith when it asked Plaintiff to sign the release form reflecting the proposed $17,000 settlement.

Plaintiff alleges other facts against co-Defendant Hyrecar that are not pertinent here.

The demurrer is meritorious. The second cause of action for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing fails because Plaintiff fails to allege that he and Pacesetter had any contractual responsibilities to one another. (CACI 325.) The third cause of action for fraud fails because Plaintiff fails to plead the claim with specificity or allege facts showing Plaintiff’s reliance on an alleged misrepresentation. (Goldrich v. Natural & Surgical Specialties, Inc. (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 772, 782-83.)

Plaintiff does not oppose the demurrer. He filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) on March 12, 2018. A party may amend its pleading once without leave of court at any time after a demurrer is filed “but before the demurrer is heard if the amended complaint… is filed and served no later than the date for filing an opposition to the demurrer.” (CCP § 472.)

The FAC was filed one court day late. No proof of service is attached. The Court may strike the FAC pursuant to CCP § 436. Instead, in the interests of justice and efficiency, the Court finds that the FAC is the operative complaint and orders Plaintiff to serve it upon Defendants within 10 days. Defendants may file a responsive pleading 30 days thereafter, or 35 days if served by mail.