What are leases and rental agreements?

Useful Rulings on Leases and Rental Agreements

Recent Rulings on Leases and Rental Agreements

YESLENDER, LLC, A PENNSYLVANIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS FIVE BULLS TRANSPORT, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

On March 17, 2020, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Five Bulls, Anacleto and Does 1-5 for: Breach of Written Agreement Breach of Written Guaranty Money Had and Received Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Common Count Fraud Constructive Trust Unfair Business Practices Failure to Compensate for All Hours Worked in Violation of Labor Code § 1198 On July 6, 2020, Five Bulls’ and Anacleto’s defaults were entered.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

CHING FU CHANG, ET AL. VS PAN MING LEI, ET AL.

On August 8, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Defendants and Does 1-20 for: Breach of Contract Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Common Count Fraud Constructive Trust Unfair Business Practices Failure to Compensate for All Hours Worked in Violation of Labor Code § 1198 On October 3, 2019, Wu’s, Pan’s, ZHDI’s, Trend’s and Z&SHDI’s defaults were entered.

  • Hearing

    Jul 29, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MED CAFE CORP, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS MOSTAFA KARIMBEIK, ET AL.

., for how long it was not allowed to operate a restaurant and when the constructive eviction occurred or started. Moreover, if Plaintiff did not take possession of the property, it does not have a claim for constructive eviction, as Defendants’ conduct was no more than a breach of contract. Thus, Defendants’ demurrer to the fifth cause of action is SUSTAINED, with twenty (20) days leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

VINCENT BERRY VS EVERPORT TERMINAL SERVICES, INC.

Therefore, when Plaintiff fell ill with pneumonia, he was, at the very least, on constructive notice that CFRA leave was available to him, unlike the plaintiffs in Faust and Moore. More substantively, the Court of Appeal in Moore implied that a failure to expressly notify an employee that he has rights and that those rights arise under the FMLA is actionable only if it affects the employee’s rights under the statute. (248 Cal.App.4th at p. 253.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

JEAN NDJONGO VS HENRY M. WILLIS, ET AL.

Even if Willis had not fraudulent intent, a careless misstatement may constitute constructive fraud in the context of a fiduciary relationship. (Id.) Further, although Defendants argue that Willis’ failure to send the psychiatrist report did not change the result of termination, the TAC alleges that he would have informed LAWA himself that he was cleared to work but-for Willis’ representations, and that he would not have been terminated if LAWA received the report. (TAC ¶¶ 29-30.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

HILARY VON GERLACH VS. FRG PLAZA, LLC

Further, Defendant’s argument is a defense that can be properly alleged in an Answer. 2nd COA Breach of the Implied Warranty of Habitability: Preliminarily, it is noted that the Court of Appeal opined that the habitability claim is sufficiently pled based upon the allegation that Defendant had notice of the defective staircase and failed to repair and maintain the staircase.

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

ESTATE OF ALPHONSA LINDSEY

Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Constructive Trust Appearances required. Parties must come prepared to discuss why the Court should not strike the “Petition for Constructive Trust” as improperly filed, as Petitioners are attacking the validity of the Anna E. Johnson Trust admittedly under trust provisions of the Probate Code. From the pleading, this Petition should have been filed in a separate trust matter and related to this decedent’s estate case, not filed in the estate case.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

  • Judge Jed Beebe
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

MIRNA AMAYA VS THE SALVATION ARMY

The critical issue here is whether Salvation Army had notice, either actual or constructive, of the dangerous condition of the premises in sufficient time to either correct it or warn patrons of its existence. For a store owner to be liable for injuries to a business invitee caused by a dangerous condition on its premises, the owner must have actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition. (Ortega, supra, 26 Cal.4th at p. 1203.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

ANTONE NINO AND NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, A PARTNERSHIP VS NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS GENERAL PARTNER, ETC., ET AL.

The FAC asserts causes of action for: (1) damages for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud and constructive fraud by general partner; (2) misappropriation and conversion of partnership assets by general partner; (3) accounting by general partner; (4) restitution and disgorgement of partnership assets misappropriated by general partner; (5) cancellation and damages for voidable transactions; (6) declaration of voidness of illegal financial transactions between attorney and clients induced by undue influence

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

RISCONSIN VS SEA BLUFF CANYON VILLAGE H.O.A.

Standard Pacific Corp. (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 722, 728-729 (“The breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, and negligence claims are principally based on the …Board Members withholding information and improperly directing the expenditure of funds.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

ANTONE NINO AND NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, A PARTNERSHIP VS NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS GENERAL PARTNER, ETC., ET AL.

The FAC asserts causes of action for: (1) damages for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud and constructive fraud by general partner; (2) misappropriation and conversion of partnership assets by general partner; (3) accounting by general partner; (4) restitution and disgorgement of partnership assets misappropriated by general partner; (5) cancellation and damages for voidable transactions; (6) declaration of voidness of illegal financial transactions between attorney and clients induced by undue influence

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

MASSE VS. FRUEHAN

Additionally, absent a wrongful eviction claim, which the FAC does not allege, a landlord’s alleged breach of the implied covenant of quiet enjoyment is not a tort which allows tenants to recover punitive damages. (Ginsberg v. Gamson (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 873, 899-902.) Should Plaintiffs wish to amend the complaint to address the issues herein, Plaintiffs shall file and serve an amended complaint within 15 days of service of the notice of ruling. Moving party to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

ROSELLE CARLIN VS EVICTION RECOVERY GROUP, AN UNKNOWN BUSINESS ENTITY; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 25 INCLUSIVE

Based on the foregoing, Defendant Eviction Recovery Group’s Demurrer to the Complaint is SUSTAINED WITH 20 DAYS’ LEAVE TO AMEND. Moving party to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

FELIPE GARCIA INGUEZ ET AL VS TED GUERRA

Plaintiffs had asserted the affirmative defenses of breach of warranty of habitability, retaliatory eviction, violation of Civil Code section 1941.1 habitability requirements, and violation of Health and Safety Code section 17920.3 habitability requirements. (DSS 8.) Because Plaintiffs raised these affirmative defenses in response to Defendant’s unlawful detainer action for possession of the property, there are no identical claims for the principle of res judicata to apply.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

GOODSELL V. HAVEN HOUSE RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES, INC.

Merits Plaintiff requests a preliminary injunction to “enjoin any and all eviction proceedings and/or attempts to evict him or any of his agents from the real property commonly known as 2521 Union Avenue, La Habra, CA 90631.” Code of Civil Procedure section 526(a) sets forth the conditions upon which a preliminary injunction may be granted.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

MASSE VS. FRUEHAN

Additionally, absent a wrongful eviction claim, which the FAC does not allege, a landlord’s alleged breach of the implied covenant of quiet enjoyment is not a tort which allows tenants to recover punitive damages. (Ginsberg v. Gamson (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 873, 899-902.) Should Plaintiffs wish to amend the complaint to address the issues herein, Plaintiffs shall file and serve an amended complaint within 15 days of service of the notice of ruling. Moving party to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

ADAMS ANTIOCH WAREHOUSE VS. JASON WALKER

Plaintiff’s Claim of No Constructive Notice Plaintiff argues that the Adams family’s continued use of the easement defeats any argument of constructive notice. But any such use had nothing to do with the City, which no longer claimed any interest in the property at all.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

BRUCE A ARONSON VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC

“Under a long line of cases, the fact that the victim had constructive notice of the truth from public records is no defense to fraud. The existence of such public records may be relevant to whether the victim's reliance was justifiable, but it is not, by itself, conclusive.” Alfaro v. Cmty. Hous. Improvement Sys. & Planning Assn., Inc. (2009) 171 Cal. App. 4th 1356 1385–86.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

RONALD GREEN VS LOS ANGELES WORLD AIRPORTS ET AL

(b) A public entity had constructive notice of a dangerous condition within the meaning of subdivision (b) of Section 835 only if the plaintiff establishes the condition had existed for such a period of time and was of such an obvious nature that the public entity, in the exercise of due care, should have discovered the condition and its dangerous character.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

ANDREW M. EGBE VS SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC., ET AL.

Plaintiff asserted a new litany of claims: (1) negligence, (2) negligent misrepresentation, (3) fraud, (4) fraud, (5) cancellation of instrument, (6) void or cancel notice of default, (7) breach of contract – promissory estoppel, (8) breach of contract, (9) breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, (10) injunctive relief, (11) concealment, and (12) constructive fraud. (Ibid.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

RONALD GREEN VS LOS ANGELES WORLD AIRPORTS ET AL

(b) A public entity had constructive notice of a dangerous condition within the meaning of subdivision (b) of Section 835 only if the plaintiff establishes the condition had existed for such a period of time and was of such an obvious nature that the public entity, in the exercise of due care, should have discovered the condition and its dangerous character.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

MICAELA LEYVA VS. KAREN BACA AN INDIVIDUAL

EC 065134 Causes of Action: From Complaint 1) Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability 2) Demand for Rent for Uninhabitable Dwelling 3) Negligent Maintenance of Premises 4) Violation of Unfair Competition Law 5) Breach of the Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment 6) Nuisance 7) IIED 8) NIED Causes of Action: From (Mendoza) Complaint 1) Wrongful Eviction 2) Retaliatory Eviction 3) Conversion 4) Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability 5) Demand for Rent for Uninhabitable Dwelling 6) Negligent Maintenance

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

SEAN ROSS PAUL VS TISHMAN SPEYER ARCHSTONE-SMITH ET AL

Plaintiff’s seventh cause of action is premised on Defendants not complying with their contractual obligations pursuant to the Tenant Habitability Plan. (Id. at ¶ 147.) A review of the Tenant Habitability Plan, which is attached to the TAC, indicates that FSC was not a party to the Tenant Habitability Plan and did not sign the Tenant Habitability Plan. (TAC at Exhibits A and B.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

KELSEA SAKAMOTO VS GLENOAKS TOWNHOMES LLC, ET AL.

The complaint alleges causes of action for breach of contract, breach of implied warranty of habitability/tenantability, breach of implied warranty of quiet enjoyment, negligence, constructive eviction, nuisance, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligent misrepresentation and intentional misrepresentation. ANALYSIS: Procedural Untimely Opposition Plaintiff has filed an untimely opposition to this motion.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

MARY INGBER ET AL VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

Plaintiffs contend Defendants had “verbal or constructive notice” prior to 12/11/16. Pursuant to Urcello, supra, constructive notice is insufficient in the dog attack context; actual notice is required. Plaintiffs rely on an animal bite report, O’Donoghue’s deposition, Montiel’s deposition, Plaintiff’s deposition, Cristalle Lim’s deposition, a County Order to Comply, the 12/13/16 letter to the Lims, Plaintiff’s 2/25/27 email, and Montiel’s e-mails to support this conclusion.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 337     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.