Court also notes that Cross-Complainant continues to make references to a violation of Bus. & Prof. Code §17200 without pleading any claim for unlawful business practices. Further leave to amend is DENIED.
Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant’s motion to strike the requests for punitive damages in the Prayer associated with the 2nd, 3rd and 4th causes of action are MOOT in light of the above rulings. The motion to strike to request for punitive damages in the Prayer associated with the 6th cause of action for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage is GRANTED with 10 days’ leave to amend. Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant has not demurred to this claim, so it is assumed to be properly stated. However the only surviving claims in the Amended Cross-Complaint are now the 1st cause of action for breach of contract, the 6th cause of action, and the 8th cause of action for Declaratory Relief. Even read as a whole, the surviving portions of the Amended Cross-Complaint do not support the conclusory allegation at 64 that “[t]he aforementioned acts of cross-defendant were willful and oppressive, fraudulent and malicious.”
- oo0oo -