Claims for breach of warranty of habitability

Useful Rulings on Breach of Warranty of Habitability

Recent Rulings on Breach of Warranty of Habitability

101-125 of 1051 results

KAREN BAGDOYAN ET AL VS ELVIR BABAKHANLOO ET AL

Based on the foregoing, plaintiffs waived any cause of action based on the warranty of habitability or illegality of the dwelling, which forms the basis of plaintiffs’ allegations here. (See Compl. ¶¶ 13-31.) “A court-approved settlement acts as a final judgment on the merits for the purposes of res judicata.” (Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. ExxonMobil Corp. (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 675, 694.) A release of “all claims and causes of action” in settlement agreement must be given a comprehensive scope.

  • Hearing

    Feb 21, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

DEANNA AIVAZIAN VS. SARKIS TERSAKIAN ET AL

The third amended complaint (“TAC”), filed January 9, 2019, alleges cause of action for: (1) breach of contract; (2) negligence; (3) breach of implied warranty of habitability and tenantability; (4) breach of implied covenant of quiet use and enjoyment; (5) constructive eviction; (6) violation of statute – Civ. Code, §1942.5; (7) violation of statute – CCP §789.3; and (8) NIED. B.

  • Hearing

    Feb 21, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ALYSSA MBELU VS HELLER

Therefore, the demurrer to the negligence and breach of the implied warranty of habitability claims is overruled. Motion to Strike The Court finds that plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts at this stage of the case to support a request for punitive damages. Therefore, the motion to strike is denied. This is the tentative ruling for an appearance hearing at 1:30 p.m. on Friday, February 21, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ALYSSA MBELU VS HELLER

Therefore, the demurrer to the negligence and breach of the implied warranty of habitability claims is overruled. Motion to Strike The Court finds that plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts at this stage of the case to support a request for punitive damages. Therefore, the motion to strike is denied. This is the tentative ruling for an appearance hearing at 1:30 p.m. on Friday, February 21, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

SEAN ROSS PAUL VS TISHMAN SPEYER ARCHSTONE-SMITH ET AL

On October 10, 2019, Plaintiff filed the operative Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) against Defendants alleging causes of action for: (1) breach of express and implied contract; (2) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing/breach of express/implied warranty of habitability; (3) fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and concealment; (4) negligence—premises liability; (5) negligence, negligent supervision, and negligent management (owner and manager); (6) negligence; (7) violation of California Business

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

ALYSSA MBELU VS HELLER

Therefore, the demurrer to the negligence and breach of the implied warranty of habitability claims is overruled. Motion to Strike The Court finds that plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts at this stage of the case to support a request for punitive damages. Therefore, the motion to strike is denied. This is the tentative ruling for an appearance hearing at 1:30 p.m. on Friday, February 21, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JOSE ARREOLA ET AL VS SNS INVESTMENT LLC

Plaintiffs allege six causes of action against all Defendants: (1) breach of the implied warranty of habitability, (2) breach of statutory warranty of habitability, (3) breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment, (4) negligence, (5) violation of Civil Code § 1942.4 and (6) private nuisance. On September 4, 2019, Plaintiff filed an amendment to the Complaint naming Defendant, Real Estate Specialists (“RES”) as doe number 2.

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

MARTIN VS. G6 HOSPITALITY

Paragraphs 31, 51, 53, 66-68, 81, 112, 125, page 8, lines 4-5, and page 10, lines 20-21 Defendant also moves to strike conclusory allegations related to the liability of particular defendants, breach of the implied warranty of habitability, and online reviews. Because a complaint is not admissible evidence, the potential for prejudice to defendant is limited. The allegations in the complaint do not obviate the requirement that plaintiff proves she is entitled to the relief sought.

  • Hearing

    Feb 19, 2020

MARIAN KNIGHT WILSON, ET AL. VS MILAGRO ROMERO, ET AL.

On October 23, 2018, Marian Knight Wilson, Abdeluh Martin, Theoressa Wilson, Nomorre Smith, Layla Smith, Mary-Etta More, and Jade Davis commenced this action against Milagro Romero and Clementina Bolanos for (1) breach of implied warranty of habitability; (2) breach of statutory warranty of habitability; (3) breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment; (4) negligence; (5) violation of Civil Code section 1942.4; and (6) private nuisance.

  • Hearing

    Feb 19, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

CRUS ARGUETA, ET AL. VS INCOME ESTATES, LLC, ET AL.

Plaintiffs bring this action for (1) breach of the implied warranty of habitability; (2) breach of covenant and right to quiet enjoyment; (3) nuisance; (4) negligence; (5) violations of Mobile Home Residency Law; (6) unfair business practices; (7) intentional infliction of emotional distress; (8) intentional misrepresentation; (9) intentional misrepresentation; and (10) imposition of constructive trust. On January 17, 2020, Kendall K.

  • Hearing

    Feb 18, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

SEAN ROSS PAUL VS TISHMAN SPEYER ARCHSTONE-SMITH ET AL

BACKGROUND Plaintiff filed the operative Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) against Defendants alleging causes of action for: (1) breach of express and implied contract; (2) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing/breach of express/implied warranty of habitability; (3) fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and concealment; (4) negligence—premises liability; (5) negligence, negligent supervision, and negligent management (owner and manager); (6) negligence; (7) violation of California Business and

  • Hearing

    Feb 18, 2020

ONESIMO CRUZ VS. LANTANA ASSOCIATES LLC

Tentative ruling for February 14, 2020 on Defendant Lanatana Associates, LLC's (1) Demurrer to the Third Amended Complaint; and (2) Motion to Strike Portions of the Second Amended Complaint Defendant Lantana Associates, LLC's Demurrer to the Third Amended Complaint (TAC) The court sustains the demurrer as to the second cause of action for breach of implied warranty of habitability, without leave to amend, because the TAC still fails to allege the third prong outlined in Quevedo v.

  • Hearing

    Feb 14, 2020

FELICIA SMITH-JAMES, ET AL. VS THE GEFFEN, 7014 WILLOUGHBY (LA), LLC, ET AL.

On October 15, 2019, Plaintiffs filed their complaint alleging causes of action against Defendants for: (1) breach of contract; (2) negligence; (3) negligence—failure to provide adequate security against criminal actions; (4) breach of right to quiet enjoyment; (5)breach of implied warranty of habitability; (6) maintenance of nuisance; (7) intentional infliction of emotional distress; (8) negligent infliction of emotional distress; (9) constructive eviction; (10) fraud and intentional misrepresentation; (11)

  • Hearing

    Feb 14, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

BRYAN EAST VS 2222 SOUTH FIGUEROA LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

The Complaint asserts causes of action for: Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability; Breach of Statutory Warranty of Habitability; Breach of the Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment; Negligence; Violation of Civil Code Section 1942.4; and Private Nuisance.

  • Hearing

    Feb 13, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

ORLANDO AVENUE PROPERTIES, LLC VS SIENA HUGH MONTESANO

This is sufficient, for purposes of pleading, to allege a breach of §1941(a)(1)’s waterproofing requirement as well as common-law breach of the warranty of habitability. Since a breach of the warranty of habitability can lie in contract, it is proper for Montesanto to label her first cause of action “Breach of Lease.” OVERRULED.

  • Hearing

    Feb 10, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

XXXX XXXXXX ET AL VS XXXXX W XXXX ET AL

xxxx & Young xxxx’s Trust and CNC Commercial Real Estate, Inc. dba CNC Properties for (1) violation of municipal codes; (2) breach of warranty of habitability; (3) violation of health and safety codes; (4) breach of covenant of quiet enjoyment; (5) nuisance; (6) constructive eviction; (7) breach of contract; (8) fraud; (9) violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200; (10) negligence; (11) violation of Civil Code section 1942.4; (12) negligence per se; (13) intentional infliction of emotional distress

  • Hearing

    Feb 10, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

VERDUZCO VS. CAMPOS

Summary of the D33 Action The operative first amended complaint in the D33 Action was filed on December 5, 2016, and pleads five causes of action, for (1) breach of implied warranty of habitability; (2) breach of statutory warranty of habitability; (3) breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment; (4) negligence; and (5) violations of unfair competition law (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200-09).

  • Hearing

    Feb 07, 2020

KATHY L COX ET AL VS VN PARTNERSHIP ET AL

Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability, Implied Warranty of Habitability, Breach of Implied Warranty of Quiet Enjoyment, Violation of Civil Code § 1941.1 and Unfair Business Practices The motion argues that the plaintiffs cannot establish that they gave notice of a breach of habitability issue that was not repaired or replaced within a reasonable time or at all, that there was a substantial interference with right to use and enjoy the premises because every required repair was made, that there was any unreasonable

  • Hearing

    Feb 07, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

BRENDA CARROLL VS GERVIS PROCTOR

Cause of Action for Breach of the Warranty of Habitability (Tort) A warranty of habitability is implied in all residential rental agreements. (Green v. Superior Court (1974) 10 Cal.3d 616, 629.) The implied warranty imposes upon the landlord the obligation to maintain leased dwellings in a habitable condition throughout the term of the lease. It is not required that landlords ensure their premises are in a perfect, aesthetically pleasing condition.

  • Hearing

    Feb 07, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

BERTHA TORRES, ET AL. VS NORTH HOLLYWOOD PARTNERS LP

Code §1941.1; (2) Breach of the Warranty of Habitability; (3) Intentional Private Nuisance; (4) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (“IIED”); and (5) Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress (“NIED”). PRESENTATION: Defendant demurred on October 02, 2019, and moved to strike positions of the Complaint on November 25, 2019. Plaintiff opposed both on December 23, 2019, and reply briefs were received on December 30, 2019.

  • Hearing

    Feb 07, 2020

CADE CARRADINE VS S.M. MORGAN INC., ET AL.

The Complaint asserts causes of action for: Premises Liability; Negligence; Negligence Per Se/Violation of West Hollywood’s Rent Stabilization; Breach of Contract/Breach of Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment; Tortious Breach of Warranty of Habitability; Retaliatory Eviction; Constructive Eviction; Fraudulent Concealment; and Bad Faith Retention of Security Deposit.

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2020

SANDRA ORTEGA ET AL VS JANET WILSON ET AL

Plaintiffs asserted nine causes of action against defendants Wilson and Trust in the complaint: (1) private nuisance, (2) breach of warranty of habitability, (3) negligent maintenance of premises, (4) intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”), (5) negligence per se, (6) breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, (7) breach of implied covenant of quiet enjoyment, (8) violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), and (9) retaliatory eviction.

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

LAMITRA GOSS, ET AL. VS R3 LOFTS, LLC, ET AL.

Each alleged violation implicates tenant safety and could give rise to a breach of the implied warranty of habitability. The notice also identifies violations related to fire safety, electricity, and plumbing throughout the entire building. Exh. A at pgs. 4-6. These alleged violations are sufficient for pleading purposes. OVERRULED. Fraud Defendants argue the fraud claims are not pled with sufficient particularity.

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

BRITTANY EMBRY, ET AL. VS NED BASSIN, ET AL.

BACKGROUND: On October 24, 2018, Plaintiffs Brittany Embry, Margo Embry, and Troy Ruff commenced this action against Ned Bassin, Rosalind Bassin, as trustees of the Bassin Family Trust for (1) breach of implied warranty of habitability; (2) breach of the statutory warranty of habitability; (3) breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment; (4) negligence; (5) violation of Civil Code section 1942.4; and (6) private nuisance.

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

VICTOR BORJAS ET AL VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

The First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) asserts causes of action for: Violation of Civil Code § 1942.4; Tortious Breach of the Warranty of Habitability; Private Nuisance; Business & Professions Code § 17200, et seq.; Negligence; Premises Liability; Violation of Los Angeles Municipal Code § 151.05.1, et al.; Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress; and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.

  • Hearing

    Feb 04, 2020

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 43     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.