The option to demurrer comes early in a lawsuit, when attorneys are particularly anxious to prove themselves to the client. In this setting it can be tempting to err on the side of recommending the zealous advocacy of a demurrer over the more measured approach of answering the complaint. However, demurrers are often unnecessary and counterproductive, especially in the current, resource-strapped environment of many California courts.
Demurrers, like motions to strike and motions for judgment on the pleadings, are facial challenges to the allegations in a complaint. The grounds for a demurrer are technically considered either “general” or “specific,” as defined by the Code of Civil Procedure. In essence, though, demurrers fall into two practical categories: those attacking fundamental legal flaws and those that target more superficial drafting errors or shortfalls in the written complaint.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
