A Demurrer Can't Attack Only Some of the Alleged Breaches

Legal malpractice complaints rarely allege that only one thing went wrong. A complaint might allege a missed deadline, a failure to advise, and a botched filing: three separate breaches, one cause of action. Defense counsel sometimes demurs to the strongest-looking one or two and leaves the rest unaddressed. That doesn't work.

The rule

PH II, Inc. v. Superior Court, 33 Cal.App.4th 1680 (1995) holds a demurrer cannot be sustained as to only a part of a cause of action. Boyle Flats Food & Beverage v. Hall, Case No. 25STCV22185 (Los Angeles County Superior Court), applies it directly: the complaint alleged seven distinct instances of breach, and the defense's demurrer didn't address all of them. The court's own words: "the SAC alleges seven different instances of breach, and Hall has not addressed all of them. A demurrer cannot be sustained as to only a part of a cause of action." Several of the seven alleged breaches were never addressed in Hall's demurrer, and that alone was enough to defeat it in full, regardless of how strong his argument was against the ones he did address.

Why this matters

The rule turns on whether the defense's own motion covers the entire cause of action as pled, not on which breach is strongest. Missing even one alleged breach means the cause of action survives in full, carrying every other allegation along with it, including the ones the defense might have beaten on the merits.

The bottom line

If you're defending a malpractice demurrer, count the distinct breaches alleged in the complaint before you file, and make sure your motion addresses every one of them, not only the one you can beat most easily. If you're the plaintiff and a demurrer was sustained against you, check whether it reached every breach you pled. If it didn't, that gap alone may be enough to defeat it.

Methodology note: illustrated by one real California trial-court ruling (Case No. 25STCV22185, Los Angeles County Superior Court), a non-precedential tentative you can look up on the county docket, cited here for the binding authority the court itself invoked (PH II, Inc. v. Superior Court), which is the published, citable law. This is a statement of established doctrine, not a corpus-frequency claim. Nothing here is legal advice.