Is a motion for judgment on the pleadings appropriate if the complaint does not state sufficient to constitute a cause of action against a particular defendant?

A motion for judgment on the pleadings is appropriate if the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against a particular defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., 438, subd. (c)(3)(B)(ii).) "A motion for judgment on the pleadings is equivalent to a demurrer and is governed by the same de novo standard of review. [Citations.]" (Kapsimallis v. Allstate Ins. Co. (2002) 104 Cal.App.4th 667, 672.) "All properly pleaded, material facts are deemed true, but not contentions, deductions, or

Page 6

conclusions of fact or law; judicially noticeable matters may be considered. [Citations.]" (Ibid.)

A judgment or order of the lower court is presumed to be correct. (Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564.) "All intendments and presumptions are indulged to support it on matter as to which the record is silent, and error must be affirmatively shown." (Ibid.)

We note that litigants appearing in pro. per. are "restricted to the same rules of procedure as . . . required of those qualified to practice before our courts. [Citation.]" (Harding v. Collazo (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 1044, 1055.) Pro. per. status affords a litigant no special treatment. (Id. at p. 1056.)