Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-05977/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-05977-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROSALIND SMITH,

Plaintiff, No. C 09-5977 PJH

v. ORDER STRIKING DEMURRERS

MICHAEL MURPHY, et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

Plaintiff Rosalind Smith filed this action on November 17, 2009, in the Superior Court

of California, County of Alameda. On December 21, 2009, defendant VW Credit, Inc., filed

a notice of removal, alleging federal question jurisdiction, based on allegations of violations

of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. 

At some point prior to the date of removal, defendants VW Credit, Inc., and

Volkswagen of Oakland apparently answered the complaint, and alleged affirmative

defenses. (Copies of answers and affirmative defenses were not attached to the notice of

removal, and are not part of this court’s file.) On February 10, 2010, plaintiff filed a

“demurrer” to VW Credit, Inc.’s affirmative defenses (Docket No. 9), and a second

“demurrer” to Volkswagen of Oakland’s affirmative defenses (Docket No. 10).

The adequacy of pleadings may be challenged in California courts by means of a

demurrer. In federal court, however, pleading, which is procedural, is controlled by the

Case 4:09-cv-05977-PJH Document 11 Filed 02/11/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, see Hanna v. Plumer, 380 U.S. 460, 469-74 (1965), and 

determinations regarding the adequacy of pleadings are governed by the Federal Rules. 

Jackson v. East Bay Hosp., 980 F.Supp. 1341, 1353 (N.D. Cal. 1997); Bureerong v.

Uvawas, 922 F.Supp. 1450, 1480 (C.D. Cal. 1996).

The standards governing the state law procedure of demurrer differ from the

standards applied in federal court with regard to motions to dismiss and strike. 

Accordingly, plaintiff’s demurrers are STRICKEN.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 11, 2010 ______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:09-cv-05977-PJH Document 11 Filed 02/11/10 Page 2 of 2