In Pembrook v. Houston (1919) 41 Cal.App. 54, it was contended that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute actionable fraud. In discussing this point the court said: "However, the only question of the sufficiency of this complaint was raised by general demurrer, and, as it is obvious that there has been an attempt to plead the facts relied on as establishing fraud, and that the weakness of the complaint is in the insufficiency of their statement . . . we are disinclined to hold the complaint insufficient, in the absence of special demurrer." (P. 58.)