What are leases and rental agreements?

Useful Resources for Leases and Rental Agreements

Recent Rulings on Leases and Rental Agreements

76-100 of 10000 results

THOMAS J MEZA, ET AL. VS BASILE & ASSOCIATES, ET AL.

However, Plaintiffs also allege that “Defendants Magnum Property Investments LLC had an actual and constructive notice to plaintiffs’ continuing claim to the property that is the subject matter of this action.” (Id.) Defendant contends that this allegation is conclusory and implausible because there is no way that Defendant could have known of Plaintiffs’ ongoing dispute with their lender. Whether Defendant had such knowledge is an issue for the fact finder, and requires evidentiary analysis.

  • Hearing

    Jan 11, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

PHANPHEN CHANACHIT VS PORNPANAWAN WONGSAROD

On October 7, 2020, Plaintiff Phanphen Chanachit commenced this action against Defendant Pornpanawan Wogsarod for (1) quiet title; (2) breach of oral contract; (3) constructive trust; (4) conversion; (5) unjust enrichment; and (6) declaratory relief. On October 22, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice of lis pendens. On November 23, 2020, Defendant filed the instant motion to strike portions of the complaint that relate to punitive damages, treble damages, and attorneys’ fees. ANALYSIS: I.

  • Hearing

    Jan 11, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

CHELSEA HERZOG VS NUSIL TECHNOLOGY LLC ET AL

Plaintiff’s complaint alleges eighteen causes of action, including claims for disability discrimination, harassment, retaliation, failure to accommodate, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and constructive wrongful termination. Defendants deny the allegations. The complaint was filed on June 27, 2019. The trial date for this action was originally set by the court, in January 2020, for June 12, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

BRUNO LOPEZ ET AL VS GUILLEN MARTIN ET AL

On September 8, 2020, plaintiffs filed their complaint against defendant for (1) breach of contract, (2) breach of the implied warranty of habitability, (3) nuisance, (4) intentional infliction of emotional distress, (5) negligence, (6) wrongful eviction, (7) violation of Civil Code Section 1942.4, and (8) retaliatory eviction in violation of Civil Code Section 1942.5.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

JANE DOE VS SKANSKA USA CIVIL WEST CALIFORNIA DISTRICT, INC., ET AL.

52.4, (7) retaliation in violation of FEHA, (8) failure to provide reasonable accommodation in violation of FEHA, (9) failure to engage in the interactive process in violation of FEHA, (10) failure to prevent discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in violation of FEHA, (11) breach of express oral contract not to terminate employment without good cause, (12) breach of implied-in-fact contract not to terminate employment without good cause, (13) negligent hiring, supervision, and retention, (14) wrongful constructive

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

AKIRA KOKUBU VS TAKASHI SUDO, ET AL.

The US Entity Investors assert causes of action for (1) breach of contract, (2) fraud, (3) concealment, (4) constructive trust, and (5) injunctive relief. The US Entity Investors dismissed their fourth and fifth causes of action on October 15, 2019. The US Investors Cross-Complaint alleges the following two fraudulent acts: First, the US Entity Investors allege that TIC 2 bears false signatures from Niemann, Kazan, and Rosenwald.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

JESSICA KRAMER VS WARREN PROPERTIES 2021 OLIVE

Plaintiff alleges that defendants breached the implied warranty of habitability by causing and then later failing to correct substandard conditions at the premises, including water leaks and sewer leaks. Plaintiff alleges that she was unaware of the defective sewer and plumbing pipes upon leasing the property, as such issues were not apparent on a reasonable inspection of the unit, and that she notified management of the problems, but defendants failed to properly repair.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

LINDA J. PORE VS. LEONARD SMILOWITZ, ET AL.

F-49 Calendar # 6 Date: 1-8-21 Case #NVC017817 AMEND MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff, Linda Pore, pro per RESPONDING PARTY: Unopposed/Defendant, Leonard Smilowitz RELIEF REQUESTED Motion to Amend the Judgment to Conform to Proof SUMMARY OF ACTION On August 2, 1988, Plaintiff Linda Pore filed a complaint against Defendant Leonard Smilowitz for Establish Existence of Destroyed Agreement, Constructive Trust, Invalidate Deeds, Quiet Title, Declaratory Relief, Conversion and Common Counts.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

BLUHM V BLAKE

Even if defendant qualifies as a “covered person” entitled to eviction protection until December 31, 2020, that eviction protection only extends to tenants being evicted for failure to pay rent or make a house payment.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

CARLOS SANTOS, AN INDIVIDUAL, BY AND THROUGHT HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM MARIA SANTOS VS NELVILLE GUEST HOME-WASHINGTON; A BUSINESS, ET AL.

The complaint alleges that prior to the dates plaintiff was sexually assaulted and raped, employees and agents of defendants including Nelville Guest Home who were responsible for hiring, training, retaining and supervising employees, such as and including the Doe defendants were aware of complaints, had actual or constructive knowledge, and/or knew or should have known that the Doe defendants had engaged in prior sexual misconduct toward, or sexual harassment of residents, or that the Doe defendants posed a

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

BLUHM V BLAKE

Even if defendant qualifies as a “covered person” entitled to eviction protection until December 31, 2020, that eviction protection only extends to tenants being evicted for failure to pay rent or make a house payment.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

ROIC CALIFORNIA, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS ANTONIO FRAYRE

., “Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles Further Amending and Restating the Executive Order for an Eviction Moratorium During Existence of a Local Health Emergency Regarding Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)” dated July 21, 2020) and Granted as to Exhibit C (i.e., Executive Order N-37-20 dated March 27, 2020).

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

EMAD YOUNIS VS ROBERT MELGOZA, ET AL.

On March 3, 2020, Plaintiff in pro per filed a 19 cause of action complaint for Declaratory Relief, Breach of Contract (second and sixth causes of action), Conversion (third and ninth causes of action), Actual Fraud and Deceit (fourth and seventh causes of action), Constructive Fraud (fifth and eighth causes of action), Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, Promissory Estoppel, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage, Unfair Competition, Unjust

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

NEIL SAMUEL VS VE PROPERTIES LLC ET AL

Finally, Plaintiff has not presented any evidence to demonstrate that Defendants had actual or constructive notice of the alleged dangerous condition. “Because the owner is not the insurer of the visitor's personal safety, the owner's actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition is a key to establishing its liability.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

HOVHANES ABASSIAN VS JOHN MCDOWELL

Demurrer to the first cause of action for wrongful eviction is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND on the ground the claim appears to be barred by res judicata/collateral estoppel based on the prior unlawful detainer judgment entered in favor of defendant and against plaintiff which appears to have necessarily and finally determined the issue of the propriety of the eviction.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

KNEIFL, ET AL. V. FOOTHILL REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, ET AL.

Dowds, supra, 152 Cal.App.4th 518, 528, the Court explained that “[t]hree essential elements must be present to raise a negligent act to the level of willful misconduct: (1) actual or constructive knowledge of the peril to be apprehended, (2) actual or constructive knowledge that injury is a probable, as opposed to a possible, result of the danger, and (3) conscious failure to act to avoid the peril.” (Id. at p. 528 [internal citations omitted]; see also Colich & Sons v.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

NIRA WOODS, DR. VS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPEMENT

She alleges that Dowdall Defendants continue to authorize the digitally searchable database created by the surveillance system and they fraudulently wrote Plaintiff eviction letters. (Id., ¶¶25-26.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

CLARK & TREVITHICK, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION VS VIVIAN JASPER, ET AL.

The complaint alleges ten causes of action for: (1) Conversion, (2) Fraud, (3) Conspiracy to Commit Fraud, (4) Breach of Fiduciary Duty, (5) Conspiracy to Commit Breach of Fiduciary Duty, (6) Breach of Duty of Loyalty, (7) Conspiracy to Commit Breach of Duty of Loyalty, (8) Unjust Enrichment, (9) Voidable/Fraudulent Transfer, and (10) Constructive Trust. On August 17, 2020, Defendants filed the instant demurrer to the second, third, fifth, seventh causes of action.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

THE BLT TRUST VS WILLS

Plaintiff originally alleged the following four causes of action: (1) Specific Performance of Rents and Profit Cause and for Appointment of Receiver (2) Injunctive Relief (3) Fraud (4) Constructive/Resulting Trust On October 6, 2020, Plaintiff formally dismissed its Second and Third Causes of Action. (ROA 22.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2021

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

PIROMALLO VS GALLO

Specific to the constructive fraud cause of action, as set forth above, the court finds the complaint alleges facts sufficient to support a finding of a fiduciary relationship based on the alleged partnership [Cplt. ¶ 42]. The court is not persuaded by Defendants' arguments as to allegations of misrepresentations of future events. "[T] the nature of promissory fraud is that it is a promise of future performance with no present intent to actually perform. (Lazar v.

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2021

JOSE CABRERA, ET AL. VS LOIS M. EDWARDS, ET AL.

The FAC asserts the following causes of action: (1) Fraud; (2) Breach of Contract; (3) Implied in Fact Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; (4) Unjust Enrichment; (5) Injunction; (6) Conspiracy to Defraud; (7) Constructive Trust; (8) Quiet Title; and (9) Partition. Defendant LOIS M.

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

CAMERON T. NEVINS VS VAN ORDEN

Nevins must have known (or, at the very least, had constructive or inquiry notice) of the lawsuit and the ongoing disputes with Management. Mr. Nevins, for his part, produces a declaration stating, essentially, that he primarily lived elsewhere and only resided in the mobile home "off and on" during 2015, as he primarily used the mobile home on weekends, did not use the mobile home for receiving mail, and did not commingle with the neighbors (as his mobile home faced outward toward the beach).

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CRUSADER INSURANCE COMPANY VS BEN A. MANESH, TRUSTEE OF THE JOEL ELI REVOCABLE TRUST DATED MARCH 8, 2012, ET AL.

As Defendants correctly note, Swain does not stand for the proposition that a wrongful eviction is a willful act under Ins. Code section 533. Opp. at 13. Swain only establishes that that a wrongful eviction claim involves an intentional act: the act of eviction. 99 Cal.App.4th at 9 (wrongful eviction was not “occurrence” under policy, which is defined as an accident, because wrongful evidence is intentional act).

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2021

  • Type

    Insurance

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

RAFAEL VELAZQUEZ VS GLORIA MARIA LOPEZ

The Complaint asserts causes of action for: Breach of Contract (against Lopez); Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing (against Lopez); Fraud; Rescission (against Lopez); Constructive Trust; and Unfair Business Practices. On November 4, 2019, default was entered as to Defendant Lopez. On June 3, 2020, Plaintiffs filed an Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name) correcting Deisy Gonzales Ibarra to Deysi Gonalzez Ibarra.

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ANTRANIG DEMIRDJIAN, ET AL. VS MARY DERPARSEGHIAN, ET AL.

and (15) voidable transfer (constructive fraud).

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.