In this case, the plaintiff owned and operated a daycare and preschool on property owned by our clients, who were individuals and business entities.  The plaintiff filed suit against our clients claiming that they breached oral and written contracts related to the operation of the daycare and preschool.  Plaintiff also alleged that defendants tortiously interfered with her business and prospective business opportunities.  Finally, plaintiff alleged that her business was wrongfully evicted from the property.  The lawsuit sought damages for loss business profits and future business profits, as well as punitive damages and attorney’s fees.  Defendants demurred to the initial complaint, which was procedurally defective on its face.  In lieu of filing an opposition, plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint, which completely changed the facts from the initial Complaint to get around the procedural defects of the statute of limitations and statute of fraud defenses.  Defendants demurred based on the “sham pleading” doctrine.  The Court dismissed all individual defendants and gave plaintiff leave to amend as to the business entities.  Also, the Court found that the tortious interference with contract and prospective economic advantage claims were barred by the statute of limitations.  Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint alleging the same facts as the previous two complaints and attached the alleged contract.  Defendants again demurred based on the fact that there was no privity of contract and because the facts alleged did not show that the remaining entity defendants caused or contributed to plaintiff’s alleged damages.  The Court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend, dismissing the case in its entirety and entitling defendants to its costs.