What is an unlawful detainer action?

Useful Rulings on Unlawful Detainer Action

Recent Rulings on Unlawful Detainer Action

1-25 of 10000 results

ANGELA WATSON VS GILBERT A. CABOT

However, character evidence is admissible to prove other facts such as “motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake or accident, or whether a defendant in a prosecution for an unlawful sexual act or attempted unlawful sexual act did not reasonably and in good faith believe that the victim consented.” (Evid. Code, § 1101(b).)

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CHUAN JUN LI VS QI ZHAO

Plaintiff is also requested to provide a copy of the dismissal of the unlawful detainer lawsuit. ANALYSIS Yes (11/14/19) Default Entered. (JC Form CIV-100.) No Dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment against specified parties under CCP 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment. (CRC 3.1800(a)(7).) Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).)

  • Hearing

    Oct 16, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Background Case No. 19PSCV00904 This is an unlawful detainer case regarding the premises located at 16010 Phoenix Drive, City of Industry, CA 91745.

  • Hearing

    Oct 07, 2020

DISABILITY SERVICES CORPORATION VS CHRIS GRANT, ET AL.

DSC’s complaint filed December 17, 2018 alleged five causes of action against Defendants for (1) Fraud, (2) Breach of Fiduciary Duty, (3) Conversion, (4) Money Had and Received and (5) Commercial Unlawful Detainer. On April 3, 2020, DSC dismissed the first and fifth causes of action against Defendants; accordingly, only the second, third and fourth causes of action (i.e., for Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Conversion and Money Had and Received) remain.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. VS STARQUEST MEDIA, L.L.C., ET AL.

“Section 17200's ‘unlawful’ prong ‘borrows violations of other laws ... and makes those unlawful practices actionable under the UCL.” (Klein v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. (2012) 202¿Cal.App.4th 1342, 1383, as modified on denial of reh'g (Feb. 24, 2012).) For a UCL claim based on fraudulent practices: “A claim based upon the fraudulent business practice prong of the UCL is ‘distinct from common law fraud.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

CAL WORLD EL MONTE, LLC VS BRIAN LAI, ET AL.

Maly’s of California, Inc. (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 612, 619.) “ Plaintiff has failed to identify any unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business practice engaged in by Maggie; accordingly, Maggie’s demurrer to the fourth cause of action is sustained.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

AG PROPERTY HOLDINGS, LLC V. NORGROVE GARDENS LLC, ET AL.

Accordingly, Plaintiff seeks to enjoin Defendants’ unlawful violations and obstructions of the easements and recover damages, including punitive damages. Now before the Court is Defendants’ motion to strike portions of the FAC. Analysis. Code of Civil Procedure section 436 authorizes a court to strike language that is “irrelevant, false, or improper” and “not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of this state…” (Code Civ. Proc., § 436(a), (b).)

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

WYATT DENNETT V. CAROLYN MAGUIRE, ET AL.

To the extent that plaintiff has alleged that Maguire should have had a lease provision prohibiting serving alcohol to underage individuals, the lease does provide that tenants agree to not use the premises for any unlawful purpose, violate any government ordinance, or create a nuisance. Underage use and distribution of alcohol is a misdemeanor under California law. B&P Code § 25658(a).

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

CHRISTINE MARTINEZ, TRUSTEE OF THE MARTINEZ REVOCABLE TRUST VS JEROLD HOWARD RUBINSTEIN, ET AL.

Jerold Howard Rubenstein, Case No. 20SMCV00300 Hearing Date August 11, 2020 Defendant’s Motion to Quash Service of Summons Defendants move to quash substitute service on their adult son in this residential unlawful detainer matter. A summons in an action for unlawful detainer may be substitute served if personal service cannot be effected with “reasonable due diligence.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §415.20.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

ESTHER ISAAC, ET AL. VS ELWYN CALIFORNIA, ET AL.

(j)(1) [it is an unlawful employment practice “[f]or an employer … or any other person, because of race … [or] national origin … . to harass an employee”].)

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

DENISE BERTONE VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

Under FEHA, in Government Code section 12940(h), “it is an unlawful employment practice for an ‘employer ... to discharge, expel, or otherwise discriminate against any person because the person has opposed any practices forbidden under this part or because the person has filed a complaint, testified, or assisted in any proceeding under this part.’” (Yanowitz v. L'Oreal USA, Inc. (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1028, 1049.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

SANDRA HEFFESSE TRUSTEE OF COLDWATER CANYON TRUST VS CLAUDIA YESENIA MENDEZ TOLEDO

In particular, a prejudgment claim of right of possession may be served on an occupant at the time an unlawful detainer is filed. CCP §1174.3. Heffesse has not shown that an unlawful detainer action cannot be filed under the emergency orders of the Judicial Council and LA Superior Court (it can).

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

SOLANGE RUTLEDGE, ET AL. VS INVITATION HOMES, 2017-2 IH BORROWER LP

Specifically, Defendants contend the lawsuit arises out of the unlawful detainer action they filed against Plaintiffs. They contend Plaintiffs cannot prevail on the complaint because the entire complaint is barred by the litigation privilege. Alternatively, they contend Plaintiffs cannot prevail on the substantive causes of action set forth in their complaint.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

CINDY CHAN VS SUDOTOUCH, LLC, ET AL.

Labor Code section 2802 states in part: (a) An employer shall indemnify his or her employee for all necessary expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his or her duties, or of his or her obedience to the directions of the employer, even though unlawful, unless the employee, at the time of obeying the directions, believed them to be unlawful. In the fourth cause of action, Plaintiff provides conclusory allegations regarding this violation.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

AFM & SAG-AFTRA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS DISTRIBUTION FUND VS STARR INDEMNITY & LIABILITY COMPANY

The UCL prohibits: (1) unlawful conduct; (2) unfair business acts or practices; (3) fraudulent business acts or practices; (4) unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising; and (5) any act prohibited under sections 17500-77.5. UCL actions based on “unlawful” conduct may be based on violations of other statutes. (See Klein v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 1342, 1383.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Insurance

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

ERIC DEVEZIN VS CHUCK DORFMAN, ET AL.

Unlawful Housing; 3. Discrimination; 4. Violation of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968; 5. Failure to Maintain Rental Housing in a Manner Fit for Occupation in Violation of Civil Code § 1941 and 1942.4; 6. Breach of Warranty of Habitability; 7. Nuisance; 8. Negligence; and 9. Violation of 24 C.F.R. § 100.7 On May 4, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant motion pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.060.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

  • Judge

    Paul A. Bacigalupo or Virginia Keeny

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MATTHEW FARMER V. BUREAU OF CANNABIS CONTROL; LORI AJAX

Horrall (1948) 85 Cal.App.2d 497, 504-505 [193 P.2d 470], held that the mere ‘expending [of] the time of the paid police officers of the city of Los Angeles in performing illegal and unauthorized acts’ constituted an unlawful use of funds which could be enjoined under section 526a. We have even extended section 526a to include actions brought by nonresident taxpayers. In Crowe v.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

SM 10000 PROPERTY, LLC VS MANSOUR ZAKHOR

Mansour Zakhor, Case No. 20SMCV01055 Hearing Date August 11, 2020 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Issue Summons in Unlawful Detainer Action Plaintiff seeks to evict residential tenant defendant Zakhor for breach of lease for refusing to allow plaintiff’s contractors and/or agents to access his unit to repair water damage.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

GILBERT-BONNAIRE V. DEMERJIAN

The Motion states, “Since that time, the Unlawful Detainer action has been suspended.” (Motion; 4:2-3.) On 7-23-20 under ROA No. 175, Defendant filed Supplemental Brief Re: Whether Second Unlawful Detainer Action is Active and Pending (Supp. Brief). The Supp. Brief states, “The second Unlawful Detainer action is not pending nor active at this time. No Unlawful Detainer action is pending and active between the parties.” (Supp. Brief; 2:13-14.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

JOMA LOGISTICS, INC. VS G&G LOGISTICS, INC., ET AL.

G&G Logistics, etc. et al., Case No. 18WCUD00763 [“Unlawful Detainer Action”]); Granted as to Exhibit 2 (i.e., verified complaint filed March 20, 2018 in the Unlawful Detainer Action); Granted as to Exhibit 3 (i.e., answer filed April 30, 2018 in the Unlawful Detainer Action) and Granted as to Exhibit 4 (i.e., judgment filed June 11, 2018 in the Unlawful Detainer Action).

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

“In an unlawful detainer action brought pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1161a, subdivision (b)(3), the plaintiff must show that he or she acquired the property at a regularly conducted sale and thereafter ‘duly perfected’ title. [Citation.]” (The Bank of New York Mellon v.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Judge

    Maurice A. Leiter or Salvatore Sirna

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ASSOCIATION OF INDEPENDENT JUDICIAL INTERPRETERS OF CALIFORNIA VS SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA ORANGE COUNTY

AIJIC intended to use produced records solely to further its non-profit organizational mission, specifically to empower its request for OCSC to refrain from unlawful exclusionary policies and to seek other legal avenues for relief on behalf of AIJIC’s members and freelance court interpreters in general. Bension-Larkin Decl., ¶5. AIJIC has a very limited operational budget.

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

ANN E. AMIS, AS SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE HGS 1996 REVOCABLE TRUST, ET AL. VS CEDRIC L. WATKINS, II, ET AL.

Issue No.6: Twelfth Cause of Action A party aids and abets the commission of a crime when he or she: (1) with knowledge of the unlawful purpose of the perpetrator; (2) with the intent or purpose of committing or encouraging or facilitating the commission of the crime; and (3) by act or advice aids, promotes, encourages or instigates the commission of the crime. (Casella v. SouthWest Dealer Services, Inc. (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 1127, 1140-1141.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ELDER OSVALDO GUTIERREZ VS LOCAL PIE, LLC, ET AL.

“FEHA makes it ‘an unlawful employment practice’ to discriminate against a person ‘in terms, conditions, or privileges of employment’ based upon sexual orientation. (§ 12940, subd. (a).) Because direct evidence of an unlawful discrimination is seldom available, courts use a system of shifting burdens to aid in the presentation and resolution of such claims at trial. (Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 354, 100 Cal.Rptr.2d 352, 8 P.3d 1089.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 11, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

JENNIFER HERRINGTON V. THE NATURE CONSERVANCY, ET AL.

The allegations of both the original complaint and FAC identify the place in which the unlawful practice is alleged to have been committed, the place where the records relevant to the practice are maintained and administered, and the place where the aggrieved person would have worked but for the alleged unlawful practice are all in North County. Applying the local venue rules, there are no allegations, and nothing before the court, which connects this action to South County.

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

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 gather your results.