In California, the deadline to meet and confer before filing a demurrer is at least five days before the responsive pleading is due, under Code of Civil Procedure Section 430.41. Because a demurrer to a complaint or cross-complaint is generally due 30 days after service, that puts the meet and confer no later than day 25. Miss the window through no fault of your own, and the statute gives you an automatic 30-day extension to file, provided you file the right declaration on time.
The Five-Day Rule
Section 430.41 requires the party planning to demur to contact the party who filed the pleading and attempt to resolve the objections before going to court. That conversation has to happen at least five days before the demurrer deadline. For a standard 30-day response window, count back: day 25 is the last safe day to meet and confer.
The clock resets every time an amended pleading is filed. If a demurrer is sustained with leave to amend and the plaintiff files an amended complaint, the demurring party has to start over — new pleading, new meet and confer, new five-day deadline measured against the new response date.
Demurrers to an Answer: A Tighter Window
The meet and confer applies to demurrers against complaints, cross-complaints, and answers alike. But a demurrer to an answer must be filed within 10 days after the answer is served, which leaves very little room. The five-day meet and confer deadline still applies, so the conversation has to happen by day 5 at the latest. Scheduling problems that would be manageable on a 30-day track can easily blow the deadline here.
The Automatic 30-Day Extension
If the parties can’t connect within the five-day window, the demurring party gets an automatic 30-day extension to file the responsive pleading. This is not discretionary and does not require a court order. To trigger it, the demurring party must file and serve a declaration under penalty of perjury, on or before the original demurrer deadline, stating that a good-faith attempt to meet and confer was made and explaining why the parties could not connect in time.
The 30-day extension runs from the date the responsive pleading was originally due, and the demurring party is protected from default during that period. Any further extension beyond the initial 30 days requires a court order and a showing of good cause.
Letters and Emails Do Not Count
Section 430.41 limits the meet and confer to three formats: in person, by telephone, or by video conference. A detailed letter or email cataloging deficiencies does not satisfy the statute, however thorough it looks. The requirement is real-time, interactive communication where both sides can respond to each other’s arguments on the spot. Relying on written correspondence is one of the most common ways attorneys miss the deadline without realizing it — the clock keeps running while the mailbox fills.
What Has to Be Discussed
A phone call that lasts thirty seconds is unlikely to satisfy the statute either. The demurring party must identify every cause of action it believes is deficient and explain the legal basis for each objection. The party who filed the pleading must then either defend its legal sufficiency with supporting authority or explain how the pleading could be amended to fix the problem. Courts evaluating good faith look at the complexity of the case, the history of the litigation, the nature of the issues, and the quality of the interaction between counsel.
The Declaration Filed with the Demurrer
Every demurrer must be accompanied by a declaration about the meet and confer, filed and served alongside the demurrer itself. The declaration takes one of two forms. If the parties met and could not resolve the objections, it describes how they met (phone, video, or in person) and states that agreement was not reached. If the other side didn’t participate, it states that the party who filed the pleading either failed to respond to the meet and confer request or refused to participate in good faith. Filing the demurrer without this declaration is a procedural defect.
If the Meet and Confer Falls Short
A court’s finding that the meet and confer was insufficient cannot be used to sustain or overrule the demurrer. Section 430.41(a)(4) says so explicitly. The demurrer rises or falls on its legal arguments. That said, a judge who sees a cursory effort may order the parties back to try again before ruling, and impressions about counsel’s professionalism tend to carry into the rest of the case.
Documenting the Conversation
Even though the live conversation is what satisfies the statute, a follow-up email summarizing what was discussed and any agreements or disagreements creates a record that supports the declaration and protects you if the other side later disputes what happened. Given that the deadline calculation depends on when the attempt occurred and whether it was made in good faith, that paper trail is worth the few minutes it takes to create.