#Bill of particulars california trial
#Bill of particulars california plus

#Bill of particulars california trial

The trial court overruled plaintiffs' demurrer, the minute order reciting that this order was entered pursuant to a letter from defendant's attorney and without objection of plaintiffs' counsel. Plaintiffs filed a demurrer to defendant's answer, the basis of this demurrer being that defendant's answer did not set forth facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the action in that the matters denied therein upon lack of information and belief were presumptively within defendant's knowledge and therefore these matters should have been admitted or denied positively. The answer was verified by defendant's attorney on the ground that defendant was outside the county in which his attorney maintained an office. Defendant, through his attorney, filed an answer to plaintiffs' complaint, denying all of the allegations of the first and second causes of action on the basis of lack of information and belief.

#Bill of particulars california plus

On the basis of these allegations plaintiffs prayed for judgment against defendant in the amount of $9,069.50 plus interest. The second 'cause of action' alleged the furnishing to defendant upon an open book account of goods with a reasonable value of $9,069.50, and incorporated the allegation of the first 'cause of action' that no part of this sum had been paid. The first 'cause of action' alleged that plaintiffs sold and delivered to defendant, at the special instance and request of defendant, goods, wares and merchandise of the reasonable value of $9,069.50, no part of which sum had been paid.

Plaintiffs verified complaint sets forth two 'causes of action' against defendant. We have concluded that although plaintiffs' motion was well taken, the trial court should have afforded defendant an opportunity to amend his answer. Defendant's contentions on this appeal are that the trial court erred in granting plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings and that even if the motion was meritorious, since it was based on a defect in the form of defendant's answer, the trial court should not have entered judgment on the pleadings without allowing defendant an opportunity to amend his answer to correct this defect. Favaro for Plaintiffs and Respondents.ĭefendant appeals from the judgment in favor of plaintiffs, which judgment was rendered in response to plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings. Cooper for Defendant and Appellant.īernard J. BEN HARDISTER, Defendant and Appellant.įred F. TED DOBBINS et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, v.