[Over simplified]. I filed a complaint for breach of contract. The party's attorney responded or "answered" and collectively our pleadings. Fast forward to the trial setting hearing transfer and a NEW judge, COUNSEL says :::: "your honor, I want to point out there is a statute of limitations here and this case is actually time barred. So if the court could review the pleadings prior to setting up the trial, I think its in the interest of judicial --as well as my clients economic interests, to see if we can take care of it on the pleadings......" JUDGE says :::: "Im going to continue this matter out a couple weeks to give me an opportunity to review all those pleadings and weigh in on the issue of statute of limitations. If I think the case is alive, then we will set trial." COUNSEL says :::: For clarification, the court will rule on whether its alive, and will do a trial setting at that time". COURT says :::: "Correct"........ 2 weeks later I got a call from Clerk who cancels my return court date. Then, soon after I received in mail "NOTICE OF RULING" adverse to my Complaint as "barred by statute". So, would this scenario be considered a "Judgment on the Pleadings" per 438?
There was much for the judge to review
In the absence of other knowledge I would say that the judge ruled that on what was alleged and was not contradicted in the other papers the law suit began after the statue of limitations for the claims asserted has expired
Yes, the court may upon its own motion grant a motion for judgment on the pleadings if either: (i) The court has no jurisdiction of the subject of the cause of action alleged in the complaint; or (ii) The complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against that defendant (such as when the facts alleges show that the claim is barred by the statute of limitations). The grounds for motion provided for in Code of Civil Procedure section 438 must appear on the face of the challenged pleading (i.e. the operative complaint) or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice.
Frank W. Chen has been licensed to practice law in California since 1988. This posting does not create any attorney-client relationship. The information presented here is general in nature and is not intended nor should be construed as legal advice for any particular case or client. For specific advice about your particular situation, please consult with your own attorney. This posting is not intended to constitute an advertisement nor a solicitation.
Years licensed, work experience, educationLegal community recognition
Peer endorsements, associations, awardsLegal thought leadership
Publications, speaking engagementsDiscipline