Preview
Michael C. Cohen, Esq. (State Bar No. 65487)
John Holman, Esq. (State Bar No. 176947)
LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL C, COHEN
101 Broadway Street
Oakland, CA 94607
4 Telephone: (510) 832-6436
Facsimile; (510) 832-6439
5
Email: mcohenicohenlegalfirm.corn
jholman cohenlegalfirm,corn
7
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
8 CYNTHIA DELATORRE and GABRIEL TREADWELL, a minor
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THK STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
12 Case No.:
CYNTHIA DELATORRE, GABRIEL
13 TREADWELL, a minor, by and through
Guardian ad Litem, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR:
14
Plaintiff, 1. VIOLATION OF OAKLAND TENANT
15 PROTECTION ORDINANCE;
vs. 2. VIOLATION OF CIVIl CODE $ 1942.4)
16 $ 1942.5;
3. NEGLIGENCE)
17 COLISEUM TRANSIT VILLAGE ONE, LP,
MICHAEL JOHNSON, URBANCORE
4. VIOLATION OF CIVIL CODE
1941.1;
8 1941,
18 DEVELOPMENT, LLC; FPI 5. HEALTH )gr SAFETY CODE I117209.3;
MANAGEMENT INC., DOES 1-25, 6. NUISANCE;
19 inclusive, 7. BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT;
8. BREACH OF IMPLIED IN FACT
20 Defendants. CONTRACT;
9. BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY
21 OF HABITABILITY
10. BREACH OF THE COVENANT OF
22 QUIET USE AND ENJOYMENT;
11. VIOLATION OF RELOCATION
23
ORDINANCE)
24
DEMAND POR JURY
25
26
27
-1-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
2 Plaintiffs allege as follows:
3 1. Plaintiff CYNTHIA DELATORRE is at all times mentioned herein a competent adults
4 who resided at 805 71" Avenue 4406, Oakland, California 94621 (herein "subject property").
5 2. Plaintiff GABRIEL TREADWELL is at all times a minor and will be represented by his
6 Guardian ad Litem.
7 3. Plaintiffs moved into the subject property on or about April 27, 2019, pursuant to a
8 written lease agreement with Defendant Coliseum Transit Village One, LP. They resided in the property
9 continuously through the present. The subject property was at all times Plaintiffs'rimary residence.
10 4. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that at all dmes mentioned herein,
11 Defendant Coliseum Transit Village One, LP, is a limited partnership, doing business in Alameda
12 County, State of California.
13 5. Plaintiffs are further informed and believe and thereon allege that at all times mentioned
14 herein, Defendant Coliseum Transit Village One, LP., is the owner of the property, and or manager of
15 the property and or landlord, at all times mentioned herein.
16 6. Plaintiffs are further informed and believe and therein allege that at all times mentioned
17 herein, Defendant Michael Johnson is the owner of the subject property, and or manager of the subject
18 property and or landlord and the owner and or managing agent of Defendant Urbancore Development,
19 LLC.
20 7. Plaintiffs are futther informed and believe and therein allege that at all times mentioned
21 herein, Defendant Urbancore Development, LLC is a limited liability corporation.
22 8. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Michael Johnson, and or
23 Urbancore Development, LLC is contractually obligated to manage the subject property, and maintain
24 the subject property in a habitable condition and or to repair and or replace defective conditions of the
25 subject propetty.
26 9. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that at all times mentioned herein,
27 FPI Management, Inc. is the manager of the subject property. Plaintiffs are further informed and believe
28 and thereon allege that at all times mentioned herein, FPI Management, Inc. was a party to a contract
-2-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 with the owner and or landlord of the subject property that obligated FPI Management, Inc. to manage
2 the subject property, maintain the subject property in a habitable condition, and repair or replace
3 defective conditions of the subject propertyd
4 10. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that at all times mentioned herein,
5 Defendant FPI Management, Inc. is a corporation.
6 11. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that at all times herein Does 1-25
7 either own, maintain, manage and or control the subject propeity. Plaintiffs do not personally know the
8 true names and capacities of the Defendants sued herein as Does I through 25, inclusive. Plaintiffs will
9 seek leave of court to amend this complaint to allege said Defendants'ue names and capacities as soon
10 as Plaintiffs ascertain them,
11 12. At all relevant times, each Defendants acted as an authorized agent, employee or other
12 representauve of each other Defendant. Each act of Defendants complained of herein was committed
13 within the scope of said agency, employment or other representation, and each act was ratified by each
14 other Defendant. Each Defendant is liable, in whole or in part, for the damages and injuries Plaintiffs
15 suffered.
16 13. This court is proper because the subject property is located in the City of Oakland, county
17 of Alameda, state of California, and the conduct complained about and damages occurred in the county
18 of Alameda, state of California.
19 14. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that at all relevant times,
20 Defendants Coliseum Transit Village One, LP, Michael Johnson, Urbancore Development and Does I-
21 25, at all times referred to herein, were in control of the propeity and acted as the subject property
22 managers and owners of the subject property during the time of Plaintiffs'enancy of the subject
23 property and conducted acts herein.
24 15, Defendants, and each of them, by and through their agents and or employees, negligently,
25 managed, maintained and or controlled the subject propeity while Plaintiffs were tenants residing in the
26 subject property,
27 16. The landlord and or Defendants, and each of them, negligently hired, trained and or
28 supervised employees and or agents to manage, repair conditions, maintain the subject property and
-3-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
building in which Plaintiffs resided, while Plaintiffs were tenants in the subject property.
17. Plaintiffs reasonably believed the subject property was in habitable condition when into
the subject property. It was only after Plaintiffs moved into the subject property they discovered that
the subject property was not in a habitable condition.
18. During Plaintiffs tenancy, there was a leak underneath the bathroom sink which caused
mold and rust damage on the side of the cabinets. The floor tile in the bathroom also started to lift up
because of the leak. Plaintiff s step-father had to fix the leak because property management was too
slow and failed to respond to the fix request in a timely manner.
19, Plaintiff alleges that while a tenant at the subject property, many essential features of the
10 subject property were not in working order and have not been repaired or fixed within a reasonable time
after Plaintiff notified Defendants, their agents and or employees.
12 20. During the time Plaintiffs resided at the subject property there were several habitability
13 issue that existed including, but not limited to, non-working heating and air conditioning system,
14 homeless living in the stairwell, trash and clutter in the garage, the smell of urine and human feces, mice
15 and ants as a result of the trash build-up, and lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified
16 Defendants of the conditions and were not repaired in a reasonable time.
17 21. Plaintiffs were relocated on or about December 31, 2022, as a result of flooding in the
18 garage, Plaintiffs moved fiom hotel to hotel and from back and forth between family and fiends before
19 moving back to the property because the repairs to the flooding took too long pursuant to the Oakland
20 Tenant Protection Ordinance.
21 22. Defendants, and each of them, failed to take afl reasonable action to cure and or correct
22 the defective conditions within a reasonable time after learning of the existence of the defective
23 conditions.
24 23. Defendants, and each of them, negligently failed to complete repairs within a reasonable
25 period of time after beginning to make repairs.
26 24. Defendants, and each of them, fuither negligently failed to enforce the non-smoking rule;
27 negligently failed to maintain the elevators; negligently allowed persons to smoke marijuana on the
28 subject property; negligently failed to maintain the internet service; negligently failed to clean the subject
-4-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
property and failed to take reasonable action to ensure the safety of the tenants; negligently failed to
maintain the garage door operation; negligently failed to maintain mailbox security; negligently failed to
maintain the plumbing and elecn'ical systems.
25. The defective HVAC unit in the subject property caused mold to grow in the property
which many of the tenants complained about to Defendants. Defendants, and each of them, negligently
failed to remove the mold from the property within a reasonable period of time.
26, Defendants, and each of them, failed to keep the common areas of the property clean and
sanitary; failed to remove trash &om the property; failed to maintain the garage and plumbing in the
propetty; and failed to maintain electricity in the subject propet@.
10 27. Plaintiffs were displaced from the property on or about Januaty I, 2023 because of
flooding in the garage and lack of electrical service in the propetty. Plaintiffs are informed and believe
12 and thereon allege that Defendants, and each of them, failed to pay them a proper relocation fee in
13 compliance with local and state law requirements.
14 28. Plaintiffs further are informed and believe and thereon allege that many of the tenants in
15 the subject property complained to the City of Oaldand Building Department about the defective
16 conditions and Defendants, and each of them, failed to make adequate and timely repairs.
17 29. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants, and each of them,
18 continued to demand and collect rent from Plaintiffs for the subject property after failing to comply with
19 the City of Oakland Building Depattment's demand to correct the defective conditions of the subject
20 property, in violation of California Civil Code tj1942,4,
21 30. Plaintiffs allege on information and believe that Defendants, and each of them, are
22 retaliating against them for demanding their rights as tenants and providing notice to Defendants to abate
23 the nuisances.
24 31. Plaintiffs have suffered, and Defendants'rongful conduct has proximately caused
25 general damages including pain, emotional distress, loss of use of the property and loss of quiet
26 enjoyment of the Property as a result of Defendants'arassment, decrease in services, and failure to
27 make necessaty repairs.
28 32. Defendants and each of them, owed Plaintiffs a duty of care to avoid injuring
Plaintiffs'5-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
person and property. By failing to make the necessary repairs in a timely and proper manner and or
retaliating against Plaintiffs for making repair requests are all violations of the Oakland Tenant Protection
Ordinance. Defendants breached their duty of care to Plaintiffs, caused Plaintiffs to suffer, including,
without limitation, actual damages, emotional distress, and attorneys'ees.
33, As a direct and proximate result of Defendants'onduct, Plaintiffs lost the exclusive use
and quiet enjoyment of the Property,
34. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants'ntentional conduct, Plaintiffs suffered
injury, including, without limitation: substantial discomfort and annoyance; a substantial reduction in
housing services, reduced enjoyment of the Property; pain, great emotional distress; and the incurring of
10 attorneys'ees, all to their damage in an amount not yet determined. The value of Plaintiffs'amages
will be presented at trial.
12 35. During Plaintiffs'enancy at the subject property, substantial habitability defects existed
13 in Plaintiffs'arious rental units and about the premises which together and individually constituted
14 violations of applicable housing laws, including, but not limited to California Health & Safety Code
15 )17920, et seq., and )26147; California Code $$ 1941, 1941.1, 1941.7, 1942.5 and 3479 and various
16 Municipal Code Sections including, but not limited to, Oaldand Tenant Protection Ordinance.
17 36. The California Supreme Court, in Green v. Superior Court (1974) 10 Cal.3d 616 held
18 that there is an implied warranty of habitability in all rental agreements.
19 37. The defective conditions in the subject property include, without limitation, all of the
20 allegations set forth in paragraph 12 above.
21 38. The uninhabitable conditions described herein were not caused by the wrongful or
22 abnormal use of the subject properly by Plaintiffs or anyone acting under their authority,
23 39. Defendants, and each of them, had actual and or constructive knowledge of the defective
24 conditions as alleged herein. Despite this knowledge, Defendants failed and refused to con ect the defects
25 in a reasonable period of time.
26 40. Defendants, and each of them, owed Plaintiffs a duty of care to avoid injuring
Plaintiffs'erson
27 and property. By failing to redress the conditions described herein in a reasonable manner and
28 within a reasonable period of time, with knowledge of the existence of such conditions, Defendants
-6-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
breached their duty of care to Plaintiffs, caused Plaintiffs to suffer injuty, including, without limitation,
pain and emotional distress, and caused Plaintiffs to incur attorneys'ees.
41, As a direct and proximate result of Defendants'onduct, Plaintiffs lost the exclusive use
and quiet enjoyment of the subject property.
42, As a direct and proximate result of Defendants'reach of said warranties and covenants,
Plaintiffs suffered injury, including, without limitation: substantial discomfott and annoyance; a
substantial reduction in housing services guaranteed by the Lease; reduced enjoyment of the subject
property; a payment of excessive rent; great emotional distress; and the incurring of attorneys'ees, all
to their damage in an amount not yet determined.
10 43. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants acted with reckless
disregard to Plaintiffs'ell-being and their rights by attempting to force them out of the subject premises
12 through harassment, intimidation, decreased services and failure to properly and timely make repairs.
13 Defendants'onduct Defendants is despicable, and they acted with malice and oppression. Plaintiffs are
14 therefore entitled to punitive damages,
15 44. Plaintiffs hereby demands a jury trial.
16 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
17 Violation of Oaldand Tenant Protection Ordinance
(Against All Defendants)
18
45. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-43 as if fully
19
set forth herein,
20
46, Plaindffs are tenants of the subject property as set forth more fully above, Defendants,
21
as the owners and managers of the subject property, violated Oaldand Tenant Protection Ordinance as
22
set forth above. Defendants breached their duty of care to Plaintiffs, caused Plaintiffs to suffer injmy,
23
including, without litnitation, actual damages, pain and suffertng, emotional distress, and attorneys'ees,
24
47. Plaintiffs satisfied the notice requirement of the Oaldand Tenant Protection before filing
25
this lawsuit.
26
48. Defendants, and each of them, by doing the acts alleged herein failed to provide housing
27
setvices required by contract or by statute, county or municipal housing, health and safety laws, or
28
threatened to do so,'ailed to pefform repairs and maintenance required by contract or by state, county or
-7-
COMPLA1NT FOR DAMAGES
1 municipal housing, health and safety laws; failed to exercise due diligence in completing repairs and
2 maintenance once undeitaken or failed to follow appropriate industry repair, containment or remediation
3 protocols designed to minimize exposure to noise, dust, lead paint, mold, asbestos, or other building
4 materials with potentially harmful health impacts; attempted to influence Plaintiffs to vacate the property
5 through failure to make timely or adequate repairs; substantially and directly interfered with Plaintiffs;
6 right to quiet use and enjoyment of the property as that right defined by California law pursuant to
7 $ 822.640(AXI), (4), (6), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13) BE (15).
8 49. Plaintiff requested Defendants and or Defendants'gent and or employee to repair the
9 property including the heating and air systems and to abate the issues related to homeless people sleeping
10 inside the stainvells, urine and feces smell, trash build-up in the garage, and to enforce the non-smoking
11 policy of the propeity. Defendants, and each of them, had a reasonable opportunity to correct the
12 unhabitable conditions, but failed to tal&e all reasonable action to rid the property of the defective
13 conditions with a reasonable amount of time.
14 50. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants, and each of them,
15 Defendants'6
acted in bad faith, with malice, fraud or oppression when doing the acts alleged herein.
violations further entitle Plaintiffs to treble damages, reasonable attorneys'ees and injunctive relief.
17 51. Defendants engaged in a pattern and practice of violating the Tenant Protection
18 Ordinance and therefore Plaintiffs are exercising her authority pursuant to OMC $ 8.22.670 (A)(2) to
19 enforce the Tenant Protection Ordinance through civil action.
20 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
21 Violation of California Civil Code g
1942.4 and 1942,5
(Against All Defendants)
22
52. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-50 as if fully
23
set forth herein.
24
53. The conduct of Defendant Coliseum Transit Village One, LP, Michael Johnson, and
25
Urbancore Development inclusive, and each of them, alleged herein, violates California Civil Code
$ 1942.4.
27
54, Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that the City of Oakland, mailed
28
Defendants or their agents a written notice of the uninhabitable conditions of the property and building
-8-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
I and required the landlord or Defendants to maire repairs and cure defective conditions of the property
2 and cure code violations peitaining to the property within a specified time period.
3 55. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that the landlord or Defendants
4 failed to correct the defective conditions within the specified time period in the notice and or within 35
5 days of the date the notice was mailed to Defendants.
6 56. The landlord or Defendants continued to demand rent fiom Plaintiffs and collect rent
7 from Plaintiffs after failing to comply with the City of Oakland's requirement to repair or replace and or
8 correct the defective conditions of the property.
9 57. The violation of California Civil Code tj1942.4, by the landlord, and or Coliseum Transit
10 Village One, LP, Michael Johnson and Urbancore Development, LLC, inclusive, proximately caused
11 Plaintiff injuiy and harm, including but not limited to pain and emotional suffering, emotional suffering,
12 emotional distress, worry, anxiety, annoyance and discomfort, denied Plaintiffs the quiet use and
13 enjoyment of the property, caused Plaintiffs to pay more rent than they were legally obligated to pay,
14 caused Plaintiffs to pay more rent than the fair rental value of the property, caused Plaintiffs to retain an
15 attorney and incur attorney fees and court costs.
16 58. Plaintiffs are fiu&her informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants, and each
17 of them, did the acts alleged herein, including but not limited to failing to repair defective conditions of
18 the propeity in a habitable condition, maintain the property in a habitable condition, demanded rent from
19 Plaintiffs or collected rent fiom Plaintiffs, to retaliate against Plaintiffs because Plaintiffs complained
20 about defective conditions in the property and or because of Plaintiffs'eacefully exercise of their legal
21 rights.
22 59. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that the landlord or Defendants,
23 and each of them, did the acts alleged herein within one hundred eighty (180) days after Plaintiffs
24 complained to Defendants about the defective condition of the propeity and requested defendants to
25 repair the defective condition, the landlord and or Defendants retaliated against Plaintiffs, as alleged
26 herein.
27 60. The landlord and or Defendants violation of California Civil Code $ 1942.5 proximately
28 caused Plaintiffs injury and harm, including but not limited to pain and suffering, emotional distress,
-9-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 annoyance and discomfort, denied Plaintiffs the quiet use and enjoyment of the property, caused
2 Plaintiffs to pay more than the reasonable rental value of the property, caused Plaintiffs to pay rent that
3 they were not legally obligated to pay, caused Plaintiffs to retain an attorney and incur attorney fee and
4 court costs.
5 61. The landlord and Defendants Coliseum Transit Village One, LP, Michael Johnson and
6 Urbancore Development, LLC inclusive, and each of them, acted willfully, intentionally and with bad
7 faith, with a reckless disregard for Plaintiffs'ights when doing the acts alleged herein.
8 62. The landlord or Defendants Coliseum Transit Village One, LP, Michael Johnson and
9 Urbancore Development, LLC inclusive, and each of them, acted with malice, fraud or oppression when
10 doing the acts alleged herein, Their conduct was despicable and outrageous.
THRID CAUSE OF ACTION
Negligence
12
(Against all Defendants)
13 63. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-61 as if fully
set forth herein.
64. Plaintiffs are informed and believes, and thereon alleges that at all relevant times,
Defendants and each of them were the owners and managers of the Property and controlled the Property,
and each of them owed a duty to Plaintiffs to provide a clean, safe and quiet premise free from conduct
to force her out of the subject property.
19 65. Plaintiffs were tenants in the subject property as set forth more fully above. Defendants,
and each of them, breached their duty to Plaintiffs by wrongfully acting or failing to act so as to
reasonably maintain the subject property and make reasonable and necessary repairs to the subject
property to protect Plaintiffs fi'om the dangerous conditions of the subject proper@, decreasing the
services of the subject property and intunating Plaintiffs with eviction all in an effort to force Plainuffs
as long-time tenants fiom the subject property.
66. Defendants negligently maintained, managed and or controlled the subject property and
negligently failed to repair defective conditions at the subject property within a reasonable period of time
while Plaintiffs were renting the subject property.
28 67. The negligence of Defendants proximately caused Plaintiff to suffer general and
- 10-
COMPLA1NT FOR DAMAGES
I economic injury, experience serious emotional distress, lose the exclusive use and quiet enjoyment of
2 the Property, overpayment of rent and reasonable attorneys'ees.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of California Civil Code g
1941 and 1941.1
(Against All Defendants)
6 68. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-66 as if fully
7 set foith herein.
8 69. Defendants owe a duty to Plaintiffs under California law to maintain the subject property
9 in a tenantable condition fit for human occupancy.
10 70, Defendants, through their wrongful acts and omissions, failed to maintain the subject
property in a tenantable condition in violanon of their statutory duties set forth in California Civil Code
tjtj 1941 and 1941.1.
13 71. Defendants, and each of them, had actual or construcnve knowledge of the housing
violations at the subject property. During the time Plaintiffs have resided at the Property, the heating and
air conditioning system was nonoperational, homeless were living in the stainvell, there was trash and
clutter in the garage, there was the smell of urine and human feces, there were mice and ants as a result
of the trash build-up, and lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the
conditions and were not repaired in a reasonable time.
19 72. The housing violations at the subject property continue to exist and have not been
20 corrected within a reasonable manner or period of time after Defendant received notice. The defective
conditions at the subject property were not caused by any act or omission of Plaintiffs.
22 73. The conduct of Defendants, and each of them, proximately caused Plaintiff to suffer
23 general and economic injuiy, experience serious emotional distress, lose the exclusive use and quiet
24 enjoyment of the Property and lost economic benefits.
25 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Nuisance
26 (Against all Defendants)
27 74. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-72 as if fully
28 set forth herein.
-11-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 75. Defendants'rongful conduct or failure to act as alleged herein injured Plaintiffs'afety
2 and health, offended their senses and substantially interfered with the use, occupancy and enjoyment of
3 the Property. During the time Plaintiffs have resided at the Propetty, the heating and air conditioning
4 system was nonoperational, homeless were living in the stainvell, there was trash and clutter in the
5 garage, there was the smell of urine and human feces, there were mice and ants as a result of the trash
6 build-up, and lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the conditions and
7 were not repaired in a reasonable time.
8 76. Defendants'onduct alleged herein created and or constitutes a private nuisance as in and
9 about the property, in violation of Civil Code (II 3479, 3481.
10 77. As a result of Defendants'rongful acts and omissions, Plaintiffs suffered pain,
11 emotional distress, worry, anxiety, loss of the use and quiet enjoyment of the subject property, and
12 foreseeable consequential damages.
13 78. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants acted with reckless
14 disregard to Plaintiffs'ell-being and their sights by to force them out of the subject premises as long
15 term tenants through intimidation, threats, decreased services and failure to make repairs in a timely or
16 proper manner. Defendants'onduct Defendants is despicable, and they acted with malice and
17 oppression. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to punitive damages.
18
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
19
Breach of Written Contract
20 (Against All Defendants)
21 79. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-77 as if fully
set forth herein.
23 80. Plaintiffs have at all relevant times reasonably peffotmed all of the terms and conditions
24 and promises they were required to perform based on the terms and conditions of the Lease, except for
the promises they are excused from performing because of Defendants'onduct, if any.
26 81, Defendants breached the terms and conditions of the Lease by doing the acts complained
about and facility to reasonably maintain the subject property in a habitable condition. During the time
Plaintiffs have resided at the Property, the heating and air conditioning system was nonoperational,
- 12-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
homeless were living in the stainvell, there was trash and clutter in the garage, there was the smell of
urine and human feces, there were mice and ants as a result of the trash build-up, and lack of adequate
security all of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the conditions and were not repaired in a reasonable
time.
82. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants'reach of the Lease, Plaintiffs suffered
damages including, without limitation, loss of use and enjoyment of the subject property, over-paid rent
for the use and occupancy of the subject property and incurred attorneys'ees.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Breach of Contract Implied-in-Pact
10 (Against all Defendants)
83. Piainnffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations contained in paragraphs 1-81
12 as if fully set forth herein.
13 84. Based on the conduct of the parties alleged herein, Plaintiffs and Defendants, and each
14 of them, entered into a contract implied-in-fact.
15 85. The conduct of Plaintiffs and Defendants alleged herein gave rise to an implied-in-fact
16 contract that Plaintiff would pay Defendants for the use of the subject property as their residence. In
17 return, Defendants would provide Plaintiffs with the exclusive use and occupancy of the subject property
18 and that Defendants would reasonably maintain the subject property in a habitable condition during
19
Plainuffs'enancy and occupancy of the subject property.
20 86. Plaintiffs at all relevant times paid rent for the exclusive use and occupancy of the subject
21 properly.
22 87. Defendants, and each of them, failed to reasonably maintain the subject propetty in a
23 habitable condition by wrongfully acting and failing to act as alleged herein.
24 88. Defendants breached the implied-in-fact contract by wrongfully acting or failing to act
25 as alleged herein, including, without limitation, failing to reasonably maintain the subject property in a
26 habitable condition and make reasonable repairs in a reasonable manner within a reasonable amount of
27 time, During the time Plaintiffs have resided at the Propetty, the heating and air conditioning system
28 was nonoperational, homeless were living in the stairwell, there was trash and clutter in the garage, there
-13-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
was the smell of uidne and human feces, there were mice and ants as a result of the trash build-up, and
lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the conditions and were not
repaired in a reasonable time.
89. Defendants'reach of the implied-in-fact contract proximately caused Plaintiffs to suffer
injmy, including, without limitation, suffering personal injmy and deterioration of health; losing the
exclusive use and quiet enjoyment of the subject property; over-paying rent'nd incurring reasonable
attorneys'ees.
90. Defendants'reach of the implied-in-fact contract also caused Plaintiffs to suffer
economic damages and lose the quiet enjoyment of the subject proper@.
10
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Breach of the Implied Warranty of Habitability
12 (Against all Defendants)
13 91. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-89 as if fully
14 set forth herein.
15 92. At all times referred to herein, Plaintiffs were the tenants of the subject propeity and
16 Defendants were the owners and managers during the relevant times as set foith herein.
17 93. Beginning in or about August 2019 to July 2023, Defendants demanded monthly rent
18 from Plaintiffs in consideration of Plaintiffs having the exclusive use and occupancy of the subject
19 property.
20 94. Defendants breached the implied warranty of habitability by wrongfully acting or failing
21 to act as alleged herein, including, without limitation, failing to reasonably maintain the subject propeity
22 in a habitable condition and make reasonable repairs in a reasonable manner within a reasonable amount
23 of time. During the time Plaintiffs have resided at the Property, the heating and air conditioning system
24 was nonoperational, homeless were living in the stairwell, there was trash and clutter in the garage, there
25 was the smell of mine and human feces, there were mice and ants as a result of the trash build-up, and
26 lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the conditions and were not
27 repaired in a reasonable time. the heating and air conditioning system was nonoperational, homeless
were living in the stainvell, there was n'ash and clutter in the garage, there was the smell of urine and
-14-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
human feces, there were mice and ants as a result of the trash build-up, and lack of adequate security all
of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the conditions and were not repaired in a reasonable time.
95. Defendants'reach of the implied wananty of habitability proximately caused Plaintiffs
to suffer injury, including, without limitation, suffering personal injuiy and deterioration of health,'osing
the exclusive use and quiet enjoyment of the subject property; over-paying rent; and incuning reasonable
attorneys'ees.
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Breach of Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment
(Against all Defendants)
96. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-94 as if fully
10
set forth herein.
97. The relationship between Plaintiffs and Defendants gave rise to a covenant of quiet
12
enjoyment, By committing the wrongful acts or wrongfully failing to act as alleged herein, Defendants
13
breached the covenant of quiet use and enjoyment.
14
98, As a result of Defendants'reach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment, Plaintiffs suffered
15
injury, including over-paying rent; losing the use and enjoyment of the subject property, incurring
reasonable attorney'ees, and suffering foreseeable consequential damages, including, without
17
limitation, physical injury and emotional distress.
ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
19 Violation of Relocation Ordinance
(Against all Defendants)
20
99. Plaintiffs re-allege and incoiporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-97 as if fully
21
set forth herein.
22
100. Defendants, and each of them, violated the City of Oakland Relocation Ordinance
23
(O.M.C. 8.22. 800 et seq.) by failing to comply with the notice requirements and or denying
24
25
Plaintiffs'elocation
fee to which they are entitled, emotional disness, and caused them to incur attorney fees and
court costs.
26
101. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants acted with reckless
27
disregard to Plaintiffs'ell-being and their legal sights.
28
-15-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
I 102. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants acted with malice,
2 fraud and or oppression when failing to pay Plaintiffs'elocation fee in compliance with the City of
3 Oakland Relocation Ordinance.
5 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray:
6 1. For general damages for pain and suffering, deterioration of health, emotional distress,
7 and annoyance and discomfort, according to proof;
8 2. For loss of use and enjoyment of the Property;
9 3. For excessive rent payments, according to proof;
10 4, For special and economic damages, according to proof;
11 5. For statutory treble damages;
12 6. For a preliminary and permanent injunction ordering Defendants to remove the lock to
13 the commercial pottion of the subject premises.
14 7. For punitive damages, according to proof;
15 8. For reasonable attorneys'ees under CaL Civil Code f 1717, 1942.4, and the cond'actual
16 provision providing for attorneys'ees in the Lease and breach of contract;
17 9. For pre-judgment interest;
18 10. For post-judgment interest; and
19 11. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
20
21 Dated: March l 4, 2024 AEL C. COHEN
22
By: Jolntgolkan, Esq~
24 Attornej for Plaintiffs
25
26
27
28
-16-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Preview
Michael C. Cohen, Esq. (State Bar No. 65487) John Holman, Esq. (State Bar No. 176947) LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL C, COHEN 101 Broadway Street Oakland, CA 94607 4 Telephone: (510) 832-6436 Facsimile; (510) 832-6439 5 Email: mcohenicohenlegalfirm.corn jholman cohenlegalfirm,corn 7 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 8 CYNTHIA DELATORRE and GABRIEL TREADWELL, a minor IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THK STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 12 Case No.: CYNTHIA DELATORRE, GABRIEL 13 TREADWELL, a minor, by and through Guardian ad Litem, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR: 14 Plaintiff, 1. VIOLATION OF OAKLAND TENANT 15 PROTECTION ORDINANCE; vs. 2. VIOLATION OF CIVIl CODE $ 1942.4) 16 $ 1942.5; 3. NEGLIGENCE) 17 COLISEUM TRANSIT VILLAGE ONE, LP, MICHAEL JOHNSON, URBANCORE 4. VIOLATION OF CIVIL CODE 1941.1; 8 1941, 18 DEVELOPMENT, LLC; FPI 5. HEALTH )gr SAFETY CODE I117209.3; MANAGEMENT INC., DOES 1-25, 6. NUISANCE; 19 inclusive, 7. BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT; 8. BREACH OF IMPLIED IN FACT 20 Defendants. CONTRACT; 9. BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY 21 OF HABITABILITY 10. BREACH OF THE COVENANT OF 22 QUIET USE AND ENJOYMENT; 11. VIOLATION OF RELOCATION 23 ORDINANCE) 24 DEMAND POR JURY 25 26 27 -1- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 2 Plaintiffs allege as follows: 3 1. Plaintiff CYNTHIA DELATORRE is at all times mentioned herein a competent adults 4 who resided at 805 71" Avenue 4406, Oakland, California 94621 (herein "subject property"). 5 2. Plaintiff GABRIEL TREADWELL is at all times a minor and will be represented by his 6 Guardian ad Litem. 7 3. Plaintiffs moved into the subject property on or about April 27, 2019, pursuant to a 8 written lease agreement with Defendant Coliseum Transit Village One, LP. They resided in the property 9 continuously through the present. The subject property was at all times Plaintiffs'rimary residence. 10 4. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that at all dmes mentioned herein, 11 Defendant Coliseum Transit Village One, LP, is a limited partnership, doing business in Alameda 12 County, State of California. 13 5. Plaintiffs are further informed and believe and thereon allege that at all times mentioned 14 herein, Defendant Coliseum Transit Village One, LP., is the owner of the property, and or manager of 15 the property and or landlord, at all times mentioned herein. 16 6. Plaintiffs are further informed and believe and therein allege that at all times mentioned 17 herein, Defendant Michael Johnson is the owner of the subject property, and or manager of the subject 18 property and or landlord and the owner and or managing agent of Defendant Urbancore Development, 19 LLC. 20 7. Plaintiffs are futther informed and believe and therein allege that at all times mentioned 21 herein, Defendant Urbancore Development, LLC is a limited liability corporation. 22 8. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Michael Johnson, and or 23 Urbancore Development, LLC is contractually obligated to manage the subject property, and maintain 24 the subject property in a habitable condition and or to repair and or replace defective conditions of the 25 subject propetty. 26 9. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that at all times mentioned herein, 27 FPI Management, Inc. is the manager of the subject property. Plaintiffs are further informed and believe 28 and thereon allege that at all times mentioned herein, FPI Management, Inc. was a party to a contract -2- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 with the owner and or landlord of the subject property that obligated FPI Management, Inc. to manage 2 the subject property, maintain the subject property in a habitable condition, and repair or replace 3 defective conditions of the subject propertyd 4 10. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that at all times mentioned herein, 5 Defendant FPI Management, Inc. is a corporation. 6 11. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that at all times herein Does 1-25 7 either own, maintain, manage and or control the subject propeity. Plaintiffs do not personally know the 8 true names and capacities of the Defendants sued herein as Does I through 25, inclusive. Plaintiffs will 9 seek leave of court to amend this complaint to allege said Defendants'ue names and capacities as soon 10 as Plaintiffs ascertain them, 11 12. At all relevant times, each Defendants acted as an authorized agent, employee or other 12 representauve of each other Defendant. Each act of Defendants complained of herein was committed 13 within the scope of said agency, employment or other representation, and each act was ratified by each 14 other Defendant. Each Defendant is liable, in whole or in part, for the damages and injuries Plaintiffs 15 suffered. 16 13. This court is proper because the subject property is located in the City of Oakland, county 17 of Alameda, state of California, and the conduct complained about and damages occurred in the county 18 of Alameda, state of California. 19 14. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that at all relevant times, 20 Defendants Coliseum Transit Village One, LP, Michael Johnson, Urbancore Development and Does I- 21 25, at all times referred to herein, were in control of the propeity and acted as the subject property 22 managers and owners of the subject property during the time of Plaintiffs'enancy of the subject 23 property and conducted acts herein. 24 15, Defendants, and each of them, by and through their agents and or employees, negligently, 25 managed, maintained and or controlled the subject propeity while Plaintiffs were tenants residing in the 26 subject property, 27 16. The landlord and or Defendants, and each of them, negligently hired, trained and or 28 supervised employees and or agents to manage, repair conditions, maintain the subject property and -3- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES building in which Plaintiffs resided, while Plaintiffs were tenants in the subject property. 17. Plaintiffs reasonably believed the subject property was in habitable condition when into the subject property. It was only after Plaintiffs moved into the subject property they discovered that the subject property was not in a habitable condition. 18. During Plaintiffs tenancy, there was a leak underneath the bathroom sink which caused mold and rust damage on the side of the cabinets. The floor tile in the bathroom also started to lift up because of the leak. Plaintiff s step-father had to fix the leak because property management was too slow and failed to respond to the fix request in a timely manner. 19, Plaintiff alleges that while a tenant at the subject property, many essential features of the 10 subject property were not in working order and have not been repaired or fixed within a reasonable time after Plaintiff notified Defendants, their agents and or employees. 12 20. During the time Plaintiffs resided at the subject property there were several habitability 13 issue that existed including, but not limited to, non-working heating and air conditioning system, 14 homeless living in the stairwell, trash and clutter in the garage, the smell of urine and human feces, mice 15 and ants as a result of the trash build-up, and lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified 16 Defendants of the conditions and were not repaired in a reasonable time. 17 21. Plaintiffs were relocated on or about December 31, 2022, as a result of flooding in the 18 garage, Plaintiffs moved fiom hotel to hotel and from back and forth between family and fiends before 19 moving back to the property because the repairs to the flooding took too long pursuant to the Oakland 20 Tenant Protection Ordinance. 21 22. Defendants, and each of them, failed to take afl reasonable action to cure and or correct 22 the defective conditions within a reasonable time after learning of the existence of the defective 23 conditions. 24 23. Defendants, and each of them, negligently failed to complete repairs within a reasonable 25 period of time after beginning to make repairs. 26 24. Defendants, and each of them, fuither negligently failed to enforce the non-smoking rule; 27 negligently failed to maintain the elevators; negligently allowed persons to smoke marijuana on the 28 subject property; negligently failed to maintain the internet service; negligently failed to clean the subject -4- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES property and failed to take reasonable action to ensure the safety of the tenants; negligently failed to maintain the garage door operation; negligently failed to maintain mailbox security; negligently failed to maintain the plumbing and elecn'ical systems. 25. The defective HVAC unit in the subject property caused mold to grow in the property which many of the tenants complained about to Defendants. Defendants, and each of them, negligently failed to remove the mold from the property within a reasonable period of time. 26, Defendants, and each of them, failed to keep the common areas of the property clean and sanitary; failed to remove trash &om the property; failed to maintain the garage and plumbing in the propetty; and failed to maintain electricity in the subject propet@. 10 27. Plaintiffs were displaced from the property on or about Januaty I, 2023 because of flooding in the garage and lack of electrical service in the propetty. Plaintiffs are informed and believe 12 and thereon allege that Defendants, and each of them, failed to pay them a proper relocation fee in 13 compliance with local and state law requirements. 14 28. Plaintiffs further are informed and believe and thereon allege that many of the tenants in 15 the subject property complained to the City of Oaldand Building Department about the defective 16 conditions and Defendants, and each of them, failed to make adequate and timely repairs. 17 29. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants, and each of them, 18 continued to demand and collect rent from Plaintiffs for the subject property after failing to comply with 19 the City of Oakland Building Depattment's demand to correct the defective conditions of the subject 20 property, in violation of California Civil Code tj1942,4, 21 30. Plaintiffs allege on information and believe that Defendants, and each of them, are 22 retaliating against them for demanding their rights as tenants and providing notice to Defendants to abate 23 the nuisances. 24 31. Plaintiffs have suffered, and Defendants'rongful conduct has proximately caused 25 general damages including pain, emotional distress, loss of use of the property and loss of quiet 26 enjoyment of the Property as a result of Defendants'arassment, decrease in services, and failure to 27 make necessaty repairs. 28 32. Defendants and each of them, owed Plaintiffs a duty of care to avoid injuring Plaintiffs'5- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES person and property. By failing to make the necessary repairs in a timely and proper manner and or retaliating against Plaintiffs for making repair requests are all violations of the Oakland Tenant Protection Ordinance. Defendants breached their duty of care to Plaintiffs, caused Plaintiffs to suffer, including, without limitation, actual damages, emotional distress, and attorneys'ees. 33, As a direct and proximate result of Defendants'onduct, Plaintiffs lost the exclusive use and quiet enjoyment of the Property, 34. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants'ntentional conduct, Plaintiffs suffered injury, including, without limitation: substantial discomfort and annoyance; a substantial reduction in housing services, reduced enjoyment of the Property; pain, great emotional distress; and the incurring of 10 attorneys'ees, all to their damage in an amount not yet determined. The value of Plaintiffs'amages will be presented at trial. 12 35. During Plaintiffs'enancy at the subject property, substantial habitability defects existed 13 in Plaintiffs'arious rental units and about the premises which together and individually constituted 14 violations of applicable housing laws, including, but not limited to California Health & Safety Code 15 )17920, et seq., and )26147; California Code $$ 1941, 1941.1, 1941.7, 1942.5 and 3479 and various 16 Municipal Code Sections including, but not limited to, Oaldand Tenant Protection Ordinance. 17 36. The California Supreme Court, in Green v. Superior Court (1974) 10 Cal.3d 616 held 18 that there is an implied warranty of habitability in all rental agreements. 19 37. The defective conditions in the subject property include, without limitation, all of the 20 allegations set forth in paragraph 12 above. 21 38. The uninhabitable conditions described herein were not caused by the wrongful or 22 abnormal use of the subject properly by Plaintiffs or anyone acting under their authority, 23 39. Defendants, and each of them, had actual and or constructive knowledge of the defective 24 conditions as alleged herein. Despite this knowledge, Defendants failed and refused to con ect the defects 25 in a reasonable period of time. 26 40. Defendants, and each of them, owed Plaintiffs a duty of care to avoid injuring Plaintiffs'erson 27 and property. By failing to redress the conditions described herein in a reasonable manner and 28 within a reasonable period of time, with knowledge of the existence of such conditions, Defendants -6- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES breached their duty of care to Plaintiffs, caused Plaintiffs to suffer injuty, including, without limitation, pain and emotional distress, and caused Plaintiffs to incur attorneys'ees. 41, As a direct and proximate result of Defendants'onduct, Plaintiffs lost the exclusive use and quiet enjoyment of the subject property. 42, As a direct and proximate result of Defendants'reach of said warranties and covenants, Plaintiffs suffered injury, including, without limitation: substantial discomfott and annoyance; a substantial reduction in housing services guaranteed by the Lease; reduced enjoyment of the subject property; a payment of excessive rent; great emotional distress; and the incurring of attorneys'ees, all to their damage in an amount not yet determined. 10 43. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants acted with reckless disregard to Plaintiffs'ell-being and their rights by attempting to force them out of the subject premises 12 through harassment, intimidation, decreased services and failure to properly and timely make repairs. 13 Defendants'onduct Defendants is despicable, and they acted with malice and oppression. Plaintiffs are 14 therefore entitled to punitive damages, 15 44. Plaintiffs hereby demands a jury trial. 16 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 17 Violation of Oaldand Tenant Protection Ordinance (Against All Defendants) 18 45. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-43 as if fully 19 set forth herein, 20 46, Plaindffs are tenants of the subject property as set forth more fully above, Defendants, 21 as the owners and managers of the subject property, violated Oaldand Tenant Protection Ordinance as 22 set forth above. Defendants breached their duty of care to Plaintiffs, caused Plaintiffs to suffer injmy, 23 including, without litnitation, actual damages, pain and suffertng, emotional distress, and attorneys'ees, 24 47. Plaintiffs satisfied the notice requirement of the Oaldand Tenant Protection before filing 25 this lawsuit. 26 48. Defendants, and each of them, by doing the acts alleged herein failed to provide housing 27 setvices required by contract or by statute, county or municipal housing, health and safety laws, or 28 threatened to do so,'ailed to pefform repairs and maintenance required by contract or by state, county or -7- COMPLA1NT FOR DAMAGES 1 municipal housing, health and safety laws; failed to exercise due diligence in completing repairs and 2 maintenance once undeitaken or failed to follow appropriate industry repair, containment or remediation 3 protocols designed to minimize exposure to noise, dust, lead paint, mold, asbestos, or other building 4 materials with potentially harmful health impacts; attempted to influence Plaintiffs to vacate the property 5 through failure to make timely or adequate repairs; substantially and directly interfered with Plaintiffs; 6 right to quiet use and enjoyment of the property as that right defined by California law pursuant to 7 $ 822.640(AXI), (4), (6), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13) BE (15). 8 49. Plaintiff requested Defendants and or Defendants'gent and or employee to repair the 9 property including the heating and air systems and to abate the issues related to homeless people sleeping 10 inside the stainvells, urine and feces smell, trash build-up in the garage, and to enforce the non-smoking 11 policy of the propeity. Defendants, and each of them, had a reasonable opportunity to correct the 12 unhabitable conditions, but failed to tal&e all reasonable action to rid the property of the defective 13 conditions with a reasonable amount of time. 14 50. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants, and each of them, 15 Defendants'6 acted in bad faith, with malice, fraud or oppression when doing the acts alleged herein. violations further entitle Plaintiffs to treble damages, reasonable attorneys'ees and injunctive relief. 17 51. Defendants engaged in a pattern and practice of violating the Tenant Protection 18 Ordinance and therefore Plaintiffs are exercising her authority pursuant to OMC $ 8.22.670 (A)(2) to 19 enforce the Tenant Protection Ordinance through civil action. 20 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 21 Violation of California Civil Code g 1942.4 and 1942,5 (Against All Defendants) 22 52. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-50 as if fully 23 set forth herein. 24 53. The conduct of Defendant Coliseum Transit Village One, LP, Michael Johnson, and 25 Urbancore Development inclusive, and each of them, alleged herein, violates California Civil Code $ 1942.4. 27 54, Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that the City of Oakland, mailed 28 Defendants or their agents a written notice of the uninhabitable conditions of the property and building -8- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES I and required the landlord or Defendants to maire repairs and cure defective conditions of the property 2 and cure code violations peitaining to the property within a specified time period. 3 55. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that the landlord or Defendants 4 failed to correct the defective conditions within the specified time period in the notice and or within 35 5 days of the date the notice was mailed to Defendants. 6 56. The landlord or Defendants continued to demand rent fiom Plaintiffs and collect rent 7 from Plaintiffs after failing to comply with the City of Oakland's requirement to repair or replace and or 8 correct the defective conditions of the property. 9 57. The violation of California Civil Code tj1942.4, by the landlord, and or Coliseum Transit 10 Village One, LP, Michael Johnson and Urbancore Development, LLC, inclusive, proximately caused 11 Plaintiff injuiy and harm, including but not limited to pain and emotional suffering, emotional suffering, 12 emotional distress, worry, anxiety, annoyance and discomfort, denied Plaintiffs the quiet use and 13 enjoyment of the property, caused Plaintiffs to pay more rent than they were legally obligated to pay, 14 caused Plaintiffs to pay more rent than the fair rental value of the property, caused Plaintiffs to retain an 15 attorney and incur attorney fees and court costs. 16 58. Plaintiffs are fiu&her informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants, and each 17 of them, did the acts alleged herein, including but not limited to failing to repair defective conditions of 18 the propeity in a habitable condition, maintain the property in a habitable condition, demanded rent from 19 Plaintiffs or collected rent fiom Plaintiffs, to retaliate against Plaintiffs because Plaintiffs complained 20 about defective conditions in the property and or because of Plaintiffs'eacefully exercise of their legal 21 rights. 22 59. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that the landlord or Defendants, 23 and each of them, did the acts alleged herein within one hundred eighty (180) days after Plaintiffs 24 complained to Defendants about the defective condition of the propeity and requested defendants to 25 repair the defective condition, the landlord and or Defendants retaliated against Plaintiffs, as alleged 26 herein. 27 60. The landlord and or Defendants violation of California Civil Code $ 1942.5 proximately 28 caused Plaintiffs injury and harm, including but not limited to pain and suffering, emotional distress, -9- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 annoyance and discomfort, denied Plaintiffs the quiet use and enjoyment of the property, caused 2 Plaintiffs to pay more than the reasonable rental value of the property, caused Plaintiffs to pay rent that 3 they were not legally obligated to pay, caused Plaintiffs to retain an attorney and incur attorney fee and 4 court costs. 5 61. The landlord and Defendants Coliseum Transit Village One, LP, Michael Johnson and 6 Urbancore Development, LLC inclusive, and each of them, acted willfully, intentionally and with bad 7 faith, with a reckless disregard for Plaintiffs'ights when doing the acts alleged herein. 8 62. The landlord or Defendants Coliseum Transit Village One, LP, Michael Johnson and 9 Urbancore Development, LLC inclusive, and each of them, acted with malice, fraud or oppression when 10 doing the acts alleged herein, Their conduct was despicable and outrageous. THRID CAUSE OF ACTION Negligence 12 (Against all Defendants) 13 63. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-61 as if fully set forth herein. 64. Plaintiffs are informed and believes, and thereon alleges that at all relevant times, Defendants and each of them were the owners and managers of the Property and controlled the Property, and each of them owed a duty to Plaintiffs to provide a clean, safe and quiet premise free from conduct to force her out of the subject property. 19 65. Plaintiffs were tenants in the subject property as set forth more fully above. Defendants, and each of them, breached their duty to Plaintiffs by wrongfully acting or failing to act so as to reasonably maintain the subject property and make reasonable and necessary repairs to the subject property to protect Plaintiffs fi'om the dangerous conditions of the subject proper@, decreasing the services of the subject property and intunating Plaintiffs with eviction all in an effort to force Plainuffs as long-time tenants fiom the subject property. 66. Defendants negligently maintained, managed and or controlled the subject property and negligently failed to repair defective conditions at the subject property within a reasonable period of time while Plaintiffs were renting the subject property. 28 67. The negligence of Defendants proximately caused Plaintiff to suffer general and - 10- COMPLA1NT FOR DAMAGES I economic injury, experience serious emotional distress, lose the exclusive use and quiet enjoyment of 2 the Property, overpayment of rent and reasonable attorneys'ees. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION Violation of California Civil Code g 1941 and 1941.1 (Against All Defendants) 6 68. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-66 as if fully 7 set foith herein. 8 69. Defendants owe a duty to Plaintiffs under California law to maintain the subject property 9 in a tenantable condition fit for human occupancy. 10 70, Defendants, through their wrongful acts and omissions, failed to maintain the subject property in a tenantable condition in violanon of their statutory duties set forth in California Civil Code tjtj 1941 and 1941.1. 13 71. Defendants, and each of them, had actual or construcnve knowledge of the housing violations at the subject property. During the time Plaintiffs have resided at the Property, the heating and air conditioning system was nonoperational, homeless were living in the stainvell, there was trash and clutter in the garage, there was the smell of urine and human feces, there were mice and ants as a result of the trash build-up, and lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the conditions and were not repaired in a reasonable time. 19 72. The housing violations at the subject property continue to exist and have not been 20 corrected within a reasonable manner or period of time after Defendant received notice. The defective conditions at the subject property were not caused by any act or omission of Plaintiffs. 22 73. The conduct of Defendants, and each of them, proximately caused Plaintiff to suffer 23 general and economic injuiy, experience serious emotional distress, lose the exclusive use and quiet 24 enjoyment of the Property and lost economic benefits. 25 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION Nuisance 26 (Against all Defendants) 27 74. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-72 as if fully 28 set forth herein. -11- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 75. Defendants'rongful conduct or failure to act as alleged herein injured Plaintiffs'afety 2 and health, offended their senses and substantially interfered with the use, occupancy and enjoyment of 3 the Property. During the time Plaintiffs have resided at the Propetty, the heating and air conditioning 4 system was nonoperational, homeless were living in the stainvell, there was trash and clutter in the 5 garage, there was the smell of urine and human feces, there were mice and ants as a result of the trash 6 build-up, and lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the conditions and 7 were not repaired in a reasonable time. 8 76. Defendants'onduct alleged herein created and or constitutes a private nuisance as in and 9 about the property, in violation of Civil Code (II 3479, 3481. 10 77. As a result of Defendants'rongful acts and omissions, Plaintiffs suffered pain, 11 emotional distress, worry, anxiety, loss of the use and quiet enjoyment of the subject property, and 12 foreseeable consequential damages. 13 78. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants acted with reckless 14 disregard to Plaintiffs'ell-being and their sights by to force them out of the subject premises as long 15 term tenants through intimidation, threats, decreased services and failure to make repairs in a timely or 16 proper manner. Defendants'onduct Defendants is despicable, and they acted with malice and 17 oppression. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to punitive damages. 18 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION 19 Breach of Written Contract 20 (Against All Defendants) 21 79. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-77 as if fully set forth herein. 23 80. Plaintiffs have at all relevant times reasonably peffotmed all of the terms and conditions 24 and promises they were required to perform based on the terms and conditions of the Lease, except for the promises they are excused from performing because of Defendants'onduct, if any. 26 81, Defendants breached the terms and conditions of the Lease by doing the acts complained about and facility to reasonably maintain the subject property in a habitable condition. During the time Plaintiffs have resided at the Property, the heating and air conditioning system was nonoperational, - 12- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES homeless were living in the stainvell, there was trash and clutter in the garage, there was the smell of urine and human feces, there were mice and ants as a result of the trash build-up, and lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the conditions and were not repaired in a reasonable time. 82. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants'reach of the Lease, Plaintiffs suffered damages including, without limitation, loss of use and enjoyment of the subject property, over-paid rent for the use and occupancy of the subject property and incurred attorneys'ees. EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION Breach of Contract Implied-in-Pact 10 (Against all Defendants) 83. Piainnffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations contained in paragraphs 1-81 12 as if fully set forth herein. 13 84. Based on the conduct of the parties alleged herein, Plaintiffs and Defendants, and each 14 of them, entered into a contract implied-in-fact. 15 85. The conduct of Plaintiffs and Defendants alleged herein gave rise to an implied-in-fact 16 contract that Plaintiff would pay Defendants for the use of the subject property as their residence. In 17 return, Defendants would provide Plaintiffs with the exclusive use and occupancy of the subject property 18 and that Defendants would reasonably maintain the subject property in a habitable condition during 19 Plainuffs'enancy and occupancy of the subject property. 20 86. Plaintiffs at all relevant times paid rent for the exclusive use and occupancy of the subject 21 properly. 22 87. Defendants, and each of them, failed to reasonably maintain the subject propetty in a 23 habitable condition by wrongfully acting and failing to act as alleged herein. 24 88. Defendants breached the implied-in-fact contract by wrongfully acting or failing to act 25 as alleged herein, including, without limitation, failing to reasonably maintain the subject property in a 26 habitable condition and make reasonable repairs in a reasonable manner within a reasonable amount of 27 time, During the time Plaintiffs have resided at the Propetty, the heating and air conditioning system 28 was nonoperational, homeless were living in the stairwell, there was trash and clutter in the garage, there -13- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES was the smell of uidne and human feces, there were mice and ants as a result of the trash build-up, and lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the conditions and were not repaired in a reasonable time. 89. Defendants'reach of the implied-in-fact contract proximately caused Plaintiffs to suffer injmy, including, without limitation, suffering personal injmy and deterioration of health; losing the exclusive use and quiet enjoyment of the subject property; over-paying rent'nd incurring reasonable attorneys'ees. 90. Defendants'reach of the implied-in-fact contract also caused Plaintiffs to suffer economic damages and lose the quiet enjoyment of the subject proper@. 10 NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION Breach of the Implied Warranty of Habitability 12 (Against all Defendants) 13 91. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-89 as if fully 14 set forth herein. 15 92. At all times referred to herein, Plaintiffs were the tenants of the subject propeity and 16 Defendants were the owners and managers during the relevant times as set foith herein. 17 93. Beginning in or about August 2019 to July 2023, Defendants demanded monthly rent 18 from Plaintiffs in consideration of Plaintiffs having the exclusive use and occupancy of the subject 19 property. 20 94. Defendants breached the implied warranty of habitability by wrongfully acting or failing 21 to act as alleged herein, including, without limitation, failing to reasonably maintain the subject propeity 22 in a habitable condition and make reasonable repairs in a reasonable manner within a reasonable amount 23 of time. During the time Plaintiffs have resided at the Property, the heating and air conditioning system 24 was nonoperational, homeless were living in the stairwell, there was trash and clutter in the garage, there 25 was the smell of mine and human feces, there were mice and ants as a result of the trash build-up, and 26 lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the conditions and were not 27 repaired in a reasonable time. the heating and air conditioning system was nonoperational, homeless were living in the stainvell, there was n'ash and clutter in the garage, there was the smell of urine and -14- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES human feces, there were mice and ants as a result of the trash build-up, and lack of adequate security all of which Plaintiffs notified Defendants of the conditions and were not repaired in a reasonable time. 95. Defendants'reach of the implied wananty of habitability proximately caused Plaintiffs to suffer injury, including, without limitation, suffering personal injuiy and deterioration of health,'osing the exclusive use and quiet enjoyment of the subject property; over-paying rent; and incuning reasonable attorneys'ees. TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION Breach of Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment (Against all Defendants) 96. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-94 as if fully 10 set forth herein. 97. The relationship between Plaintiffs and Defendants gave rise to a covenant of quiet 12 enjoyment, By committing the wrongful acts or wrongfully failing to act as alleged herein, Defendants 13 breached the covenant of quiet use and enjoyment. 14 98, As a result of Defendants'reach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment, Plaintiffs suffered 15 injury, including over-paying rent; losing the use and enjoyment of the subject property, incurring reasonable attorney'ees, and suffering foreseeable consequential damages, including, without 17 limitation, physical injury and emotional distress. ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION 19 Violation of Relocation Ordinance (Against all Defendants) 20 99. Plaintiffs re-allege and incoiporate the foregoing allegations in paragraphs 1-97 as if fully 21 set forth herein. 22 100. Defendants, and each of them, violated the City of Oakland Relocation Ordinance 23 (O.M.C. 8.22. 800 et seq.) by failing to comply with the notice requirements and or denying 24 25 Plaintiffs'elocation fee to which they are entitled, emotional disness, and caused them to incur attorney fees and court costs. 26 101. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants acted with reckless 27 disregard to Plaintiffs'ell-being and their legal sights. 28 -15- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES I 102. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants acted with malice, 2 fraud and or oppression when failing to pay Plaintiffs'elocation fee in compliance with the City of 3 Oakland Relocation Ordinance. 5 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray: 6 1. For general damages for pain and suffering, deterioration of health, emotional distress, 7 and annoyance and discomfort, according to proof; 8 2. For loss of use and enjoyment of the Property; 9 3. For excessive rent payments, according to proof; 10 4, For special and economic damages, according to proof; 11 5. For statutory treble damages; 12 6. For a preliminary and permanent injunction ordering Defendants to remove the lock to 13 the commercial pottion of the subject premises. 14 7. For punitive damages, according to proof; 15 8. For reasonable attorneys'ees under CaL Civil Code f 1717, 1942.4, and the cond'actual 16 provision providing for attorneys'ees in the Lease and breach of contract; 17 9. For pre-judgment interest; 18 10. For post-judgment interest; and 19 11. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. 20 21 Dated: March l 4, 2024 AEL C. COHEN 22 By: Jolntgolkan, Esq~ 24 Attornej for Plaintiffs 25 26 27 28 -16- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES