Preview
NIELSEN, PETERSON Br NIELSEN LLP
Jonathan Nielsen (SBN: 239416)
ICirt J. Peterson (SBN: 245071)
ELECTRONICALLY
4015 bfisston Oaks Blvd., Suite B
Camarillo, CA 93012 FILED
Telephone: (805) 639-8600 Superior Court of California,
County of San Francisco
Facsimile: (805) 228-4669
Email: nielsen npnlaw.corn 04/17/2024
Clerk of the Court
Attornevs For Plaintiff, BY: JAMES FORONDA
Deputy Clerk
DENISE MCNAUGHTON
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
10 CGC-24-614012
DENISE MCNAUGHTON ) Case Noc
11 )
Plaintiff )
12 ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
) (Unlimited Jurisdiction)
V.
13 )
) 1. BREACH OF CONTRACT
14 MENTONE HOTEL, LLC; THE JOHN ) 2. BREACH OF IMPLIED
STEWART COMPANY; and DOES 1 through ) WARRANTY OF HABITABILITY
15 ) 3. NUISANCE
100, Inclusive 4. NEGLIGENCE
)
16 ) 5. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF
Defendants. ) EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
17 ) 6. WRONGFUL EVICTION
)
18 )
)
19 )
)
20 )
)
21 )
)
22 )
)
23 )
)
)
)
25 )
)
26
)
27
28
COMPLAINT — page 1
This complaint relates to substandard living conditions at 387 Ellis Stteet, Unit ¹511, San
Francisco, CA 94102 ("SUBJECT PROPERTY"). PIAINTIFFS allege as follows:
PARTIES
1. PLAINTIFF DENISE MCNAUGHTON (hereinafter referred to as "PLAINTIFF" ) is an
individual, who at all times mentioned herein resided in the State of California, County of
San Francisco.
2. Defendant, MENTONE HOTEL, LLC (hereinafter refened to as "DEFENDANT") is a
California Limited Liability Company, who at all times mentioned herein owned and/or
managed the SUBJECT PROPERTY.
10 3. Defendant, THE JOHN STEWART COMPANY (hereinafter referred to as
"DEFENDANT") is a business entity, form unknown, who at all times mentioned herein
12 owned and/or managed the SUBJECT PROPERTY.
13 4. The true names and/or capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise of
14 DEFENDANTS, DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, are unknown to PLAINTIFF, who
15 therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names, and wig ask leave of this Court to
16 amend this Complaint when the same have been ascertained, PLAINTIFFS are informed
17 and believe, and upon such information and belief allege, that each DEFENDANT
18 designated herein as a "DOE" was responsible, neghgently, or in some other actionable
19 manner, for the events and happenings referred to herein, which pioxunately caused injury
20 and damage to PLAINTIFFS, as hereinafter alleged.
21 5. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes and thereon alleges, that at all times relevant herein,
DEFENDANTS, and each of them, were and are the agents, servants, employees, joint
venturers and partners, each of the other, and were, at all such times, acting within the
24 course and scope of said relationship; furthermore, that each said DEFENDANT, while
25 acting as a principal expressly directed, consented to, approved, affirmed and ratified each
26 and every action taken by his or her CO-DEFENDANTS, as hereinafter alleged.
27 FACTS SUPPORTING CAUSES OF ACTION
6. DEFENDANTS are the owners/managers of the SUBJECT PROPERTY.
COMPLAINT — page 2
7. The PLAINTIFF named herein ivas a tenant of DEFENDANTS at the SUBJECT
PROPERTY.
8. PLAINTIFF took possession of the SUBJECT PROPERTY on or about March 2016
pursuant to a written rental agreement. A true and correct copy of the rental agreement is
attached as Exhibit 1.
9. During the PLAINTIFF'S tenancy the DEFENDANTS failed to maintain the SUBJECT
PROPERTY therein causing and allowing slum and substandard living conditions in direct
violation of Cahfonua Civil Code Section 1941.1 and California Health gr Safety Code
Section 17290.3. During the PLAINTIFF'S tenancy the SUBJECT PROPERTY
10 substantially lacked the following (hereinafter referred to as "CONDITIONS");
a. Plumbing maintained in good working order [Cal. Civ. Code ( 1941.1(a)(2); Cal. Health
12 gr Safety Code $ 17920.3(e)];
13 b. A water supply capable of producing hot and cold running water [Cal. Civ. Code t)
14 1941.1(a)(3) CaL Health gr Safety Code ti 17920.3(5)];
15 c. Electrical lighting, with wiring and electrical equipment maintained in good working
16 order [Cal. Civ. Code ) 1941.1(a) (5); CaL Health ere Safety Code $ 17920.3(a)(10); Cal.
17 Health gr Safety Code $ 17920.3(d)];
18 The following CONDITIONS existed at the SUBJECT PROPERTY to an extent that
19 endangered life, limb, health, property, safety or welfare of the PLAINTIFF:
20 d. Visible mold growth constituting a nuisance [Cal. Health gc Safety Code $ 17920.3(c)];
21 e. Infestation of insects constituting a nuisance [Cal. Health gr Safety Code $ 17920.3(c)];
22 10. During her tenancy at the SUBJECT PROPERTY, PLAINTIFF repeatedly notified
23 DEFENDANTS in person of the CONDITIONS and requested repairs and remediation.
24 11. For example, on or around January 2020, PLAINTIFF noticed a cockroach infestation in
25 the SUBJECT PROPERTY. PLAINTIFF immediately notified DEFENDANTS in person
26 and requested pest control. DEFENDANTS gave PLAINTIFF sticky traps and an
27 exterminator came to the unit. This was not enough to abate the infestation and it continued
28 to get worse. PLAINTIFF reported to DEFENDANTS on a monthly basis.
COMPLAINT — page 3
DEFENDANTS continued to give PLAINTIFF sticky ttaps but did not properly address
the infestation, which continued to worsen throughout the next few years. The infestation
was so bad that PIAINTIFF had a cockroach in her ear and started sleeping in her car for a
period of time.
12. PLAINTIFF experienced extreme emotional distress due to the infestation and notified
DEFEDNANTS through letters from doctors dated December 2021 and April 2023 as well
as a request for new accommodations that mentioned both the cockroach in her ear and the
fact that she was sleeping in her car.
13. Since the beginning of her tenancy at the SUBJECT PROPERTY, PLAINTIFF experienced
10 other inhabitable conditions such as mold in the bathtub, water leaks, lack of hot water, and
exposed wiring. PLAINITFF notified DEFENDANTS of the CONDITIONS, but no
12 repairs were made.
13 14. On or around February 2020, the San Francisco Department of Building Inspection sent a
14 notice of violation to DEFFNDANTS regarding a broken elevator.
15 15. Despite repeated notifications of the CONDITIONS, DEFENDANTS refused to perform
16 the necessary repairs and remediation, placing the health and safety of PLAINTIFF at risk.
17 16. Frustrated with DEFENDANTS'efusal to remediate the CONDITIONS, PIAINTIFF
18 moved out of the SUBJECT PROPERTY on or around January 9, 2024.
19 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
20 BREACH OF CONTRACT
21 ( By All Plaintiffs and Against All Defendants )
22 17. PLAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in
23 the preceding paragraphs of the complaint as though set forth fully herein.
24 18. PLAINTIFF entered into a written rental contract with the DEFENDANTS to rent the
25 SUBJECT PROPERTY. Attached as Exhibit 1 is a copy of the written rental contract.
19. PLAINTIFF did all, or substantially all, of the significant thmgs that the contract required
27 them to do.
28
COMPLAINT — page 4
20. All rental contracts in the State of California contain an imphed warranty of habitability as
part of the rental contract. DEFENDANTS breached the implied warranty of habitability by
allowing the substandard CONDITIONS described in this complaint to persist and by not
remediating the CONDITIONS in a reasonable and tunely manner.
21. As a result of the DEFENDANTS'reach the PLAINTIFF was harmed.
22. DEFENDANTS'reach of the rental contract was a substantial factor in causmg
7 PLAINTIFF'S harm.
23. As a chrect and proximate result of the acts and omissions of DEFENDANTS, PLAINTIFF
incurred and continues to incur special damages m amounts according to proof at trial.
10 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF HABITABILITY
12 ( By All Plaintiffs and Against All Defendants )
13 24. PLAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in
14 the preceding paragraphs of the complaint as though set forth fully herein.
15 25. PLAINTIFF aiieges this cause of actton both in contract and tort.
16 26. DEFENDANTS had and have actual notice of the CONDITIONS.
17 27. DEFENDANTS breached the imphed warranty of habitability by allowing the substandard
18 CONDITIONS described in 0 ds complaint to persist and by not remediating the
19 CONDITIONS in a reasonable and timely manner.
20 28. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS'reach of the implied warranty of
21 habitability, PIAINTIFF suffered and continues to suffer general and special damages in
22 amounts according to proof at trial.
23 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
24 NUISANCE
25 ( By All Plaintiffs and Against All Defendants )
26 29. PLAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in
27 the preceding paragraphs of the complaint as though set forth fully herein.
28
COMPLAINT — page 5
30. At all times relevant herein the PLAINTIFF rented and occupied the SUBJECT
PROPERTY.
31. DEFENDANTS actions and omissions in allowing the substandard CONDITIONS
described in this complaint to persist and by not remediating the CONDITIONS in a
reasonable and timely manner was harmful to PLAINTIFF'S health, offensive to
PLAINTIFF'S senses, and interfered with PLAINTIFF'S use and comfortable enjoyment of
the SUBJECT PROPERTY. As such the CONDITIONS as described in this complaint
constituted a nuisance as set forth in Cal. Civ. Code it,.3479.
32. DEFENDANTS'llowing of the CONDITIONS to persist was intentional, unreasonable
10 and/or reckless and constituted conscious disregard for the health and safety of the
PLAINTIFF.
12 33. The CONDITIONS substantially interfered with PLAINTII'F'S use and enjoyment of the
13 SUBJECT PROPF RTY.
14 34. An ordinary person would reasonably be annoyed by the DEFENDANTS'onduct in
15 allowing the CONDITIONS to persist without timely and reasonable remediation. In fact,
16 PLAINTIFF was annoyed by the DEFENDANTS'onduct in allowing the CONDITIONS
17 to persist without timely and reasonable remediation.
18 35. PLAINTIFF did not consent to DEFENDANTS'onduct m allowing the CONDITIONS
19 to persist without timely and reasonable remediation.
20 36. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS'ailure to abate the nutsance at the
21 SUBJFCT PROPERTY the PLAINTIFF suffered and continues to suffer general and
22 special damages in amounts according to proof at trial.
23 37. DEFENDANTS'ctions were oppressive and malicious within the meaning of Cal. Civ.
24 Code iS 3294 in that they have intentionally, and in conscious disregard for health and safety,
25 subjected the PLAINTIFF to cruel and unjust hardship by causing them to unreasonably
26 live with the substandard and dangerous CONDITIONS at the SUBJECT PROPERTY
27 thereby entitling the PLAINTIFF to an a~ard of punitive damages.
28
DEFENDANTS'OMPLAINT
—
page 6
actions constituting malice and oppression were authorized by an offtcer, director, or a
managing agent of DEFENDANTS.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENCE
( By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants )
38. PIAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in
the preceding paragraphs oE the complaint as though set forth fully herein.
39. At all times mentioned herein DEFENDANTS owned, managed, maintained, leased, and
operated the SUBJECT PROPERTY.
10 40. PLAINTIFF was a tenant and occupant of the SUBJECT PROPERTY.
41. As landlords and or owners of the SUBJECT PROPERTY the DEFENDANTS owed a
duty of care for the safety and well-being oE PLAINTIFF by safely managing and
13 maintaining the SUBJECT PROPERTY in a safe condition for residents, tenants and/or
14 invitees such as PLAINTIFF.
15 42. DEFENDANTS breached the duty of care by allowing the CONDITIONS to persist at the
16 SUBJECT PROPERTY without reasonable and timely remediation.
17 43. DEEFNDANTS knew or should have known that its negligent maintenance of the
18 SUBJECT PROPER1Y would cause injury and demonstrated a conscious drsregard for the
19 health and safety of the PLAINTIFF.
20 44. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS'egligence PLAINTIFF has suffered
21 and continues to suffer general and special damages in amounts according to proof at trraL
22 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
23 INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
24 (By All Plaintiffs and Against All Defendants)
25 45. PLAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in
26 the preceding paragraphs of the complaint as though set forth fully herein.
27 46. DEFENDANTS'onduct was extreme, outrageous and done with reckless disregard of the
28 fact that it would certainly cause PLAINTIFF to suffer severe emotional distress.
COMPLAINT —
page 7
47. DEFENDANTS knew or reasonably should have known that their conduct would cause
emotional distress and gave httle or no though to the probable effect of their conduct.
Specifically, that the following acts and/or omissions would cause severe emotional distress:
a. Causing the PLAINTIFF to have to live with the substandard, dangerous and slum
CONDITIONS at the SUBJECT PROPERTY for an unreasonable amount of time.
b. Disrupting the PLAINTIFFS'bility to sleep due to the severe insect infestation at the
SUBJECT PROPER IY.
48. The way that DEFENDANTS had the PLAINTIFF living was reckless, and or malicious,
and done for the purpose of causing PLAINTIFF to suffer humiliation, mental anguish, and
10 emotional distress.
49. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS'utrageous conduct PLAINTIFF
12 suffered severe mental and emotional distress. This emotional distress has caused
13 PLAINTIFF to sustain general and special damages in amounts according to proof.
14 50. DEFENDANTS'ctions were oppressive and malicious within the meaning of Cal. Civ.
15 Code ( 3294 in that they have intentionally, and in conscious disregard for health and safety,
subjected the PLAINTIFF to cruel and unjust hardship by causing them to unreasonably
17 live with the substandard and dangerous CONDITIONS at the SUBJECT PROPERTY
thereby entitling the PLAINTIFF to an award of punitive damages.
DEFENDANTS'ctions
19 constituting mahce and oppression were authorized by an officer, director, or a
20 managing agent of DEFENDANTS.
21 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
22 WRONGFUL EVICTION
23 (By All Plaintiffs and Against All Defendants)
24 51. PLAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in
25 the preceding paragraphs of the complaint as though set forth fully herein.
26 52. As tenants and residents at the SUBJECT PROPERTY the PLAINTIFF had legal rights and
27 privdcges to use and enjoyment of the SUBJECT PROPFRTY.
28
COMPLAINT — page 8
53. DEFENDANTS substantially interfered with PLAINTIFF'S use and enjoyment of the
SUBJECT PROPERTY by doing the following;
a. Allowing the CONDITIONS to persist at the SUBJECT PROPERTY without
reasonable and timely remediation.
54. Due to the conduct alleged herein the PLAINTIFF was forced to vacate the SUBJECT
PROPERTY on or about January 9, 2024.
55. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS'onduct, PLAINTIFF has suffered
and continues to suffer general and special damages in amounts according to proof at trial.
56. DEFENDANTS'ctions were oppressive and malicious within the meaning of Cal. Civ.
10 Code ( 3294 in that they have intentionaHy and/or recklessly caused the PLAINTIFF to be
evicted from the SUBJECT PROPERTY thereby entitling the PI&INTIFF to an award of
12 punitive damages. DEFENDANTS'ctions constituting malice and oppression were
13 authorized by an officer, director, or a managing agent of DEFENDANTS.
14
15 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as follou-s:
16 1. For general damages in an amount not less than $ 250,000;
17 2. For special damages in an amount not less than $ 100,000;
18 3. For punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial;
19 4. For statutory damages in an amount not less than $ 50,000;
20 5. For pre- and post-judgment interest„
6. For reasonable attorney's fees and costs;
22 7. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
23
24 Dated: "th)+ Respectfully Submitted,
25 Nielsen, Peterson g: Nielsen
26
27
Jonathan Nielsen
28
Attorney for Plamtiffs
COMPLAINT — page 9
P 0 P P I I P
II
~
* +, ~ ~et&~
*='e;
/'
3
~e
@~'pr~
~
f~ .'-'
p. g'$
w.P '
Aj!
k
" ='4~j~44
~
Preview
NIELSEN, PETERSON Br NIELSEN LLP Jonathan Nielsen (SBN: 239416) ICirt J. Peterson (SBN: 245071) ELECTRONICALLY 4015 bfisston Oaks Blvd., Suite B Camarillo, CA 93012 FILED Telephone: (805) 639-8600 Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco Facsimile: (805) 228-4669 Email: nielsen npnlaw.corn 04/17/2024 Clerk of the Court Attornevs For Plaintiff, BY: JAMES FORONDA Deputy Clerk DENISE MCNAUGHTON SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 10 CGC-24-614012 DENISE MCNAUGHTON ) Case Noc 11 ) Plaintiff ) 12 ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES ) (Unlimited Jurisdiction) V. 13 ) ) 1. BREACH OF CONTRACT 14 MENTONE HOTEL, LLC; THE JOHN ) 2. BREACH OF IMPLIED STEWART COMPANY; and DOES 1 through ) WARRANTY OF HABITABILITY 15 ) 3. NUISANCE 100, Inclusive 4. NEGLIGENCE ) 16 ) 5. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF Defendants. ) EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 17 ) 6. WRONGFUL EVICTION ) 18 ) ) 19 ) ) 20 ) ) 21 ) ) 22 ) ) 23 ) ) ) ) 25 ) ) 26 ) 27 28 COMPLAINT — page 1 This complaint relates to substandard living conditions at 387 Ellis Stteet, Unit ¹511, San Francisco, CA 94102 ("SUBJECT PROPERTY"). PIAINTIFFS allege as follows: PARTIES 1. PLAINTIFF DENISE MCNAUGHTON (hereinafter referred to as "PLAINTIFF" ) is an individual, who at all times mentioned herein resided in the State of California, County of San Francisco. 2. Defendant, MENTONE HOTEL, LLC (hereinafter refened to as "DEFENDANT") is a California Limited Liability Company, who at all times mentioned herein owned and/or managed the SUBJECT PROPERTY. 10 3. Defendant, THE JOHN STEWART COMPANY (hereinafter referred to as "DEFENDANT") is a business entity, form unknown, who at all times mentioned herein 12 owned and/or managed the SUBJECT PROPERTY. 13 4. The true names and/or capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise of 14 DEFENDANTS, DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, are unknown to PLAINTIFF, who 15 therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names, and wig ask leave of this Court to 16 amend this Complaint when the same have been ascertained, PLAINTIFFS are informed 17 and believe, and upon such information and belief allege, that each DEFENDANT 18 designated herein as a "DOE" was responsible, neghgently, or in some other actionable 19 manner, for the events and happenings referred to herein, which pioxunately caused injury 20 and damage to PLAINTIFFS, as hereinafter alleged. 21 5. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes and thereon alleges, that at all times relevant herein, DEFENDANTS, and each of them, were and are the agents, servants, employees, joint venturers and partners, each of the other, and were, at all such times, acting within the 24 course and scope of said relationship; furthermore, that each said DEFENDANT, while 25 acting as a principal expressly directed, consented to, approved, affirmed and ratified each 26 and every action taken by his or her CO-DEFENDANTS, as hereinafter alleged. 27 FACTS SUPPORTING CAUSES OF ACTION 6. DEFENDANTS are the owners/managers of the SUBJECT PROPERTY. COMPLAINT — page 2 7. The PLAINTIFF named herein ivas a tenant of DEFENDANTS at the SUBJECT PROPERTY. 8. PLAINTIFF took possession of the SUBJECT PROPERTY on or about March 2016 pursuant to a written rental agreement. A true and correct copy of the rental agreement is attached as Exhibit 1. 9. During the PLAINTIFF'S tenancy the DEFENDANTS failed to maintain the SUBJECT PROPERTY therein causing and allowing slum and substandard living conditions in direct violation of Cahfonua Civil Code Section 1941.1 and California Health gr Safety Code Section 17290.3. During the PLAINTIFF'S tenancy the SUBJECT PROPERTY 10 substantially lacked the following (hereinafter referred to as "CONDITIONS"); a. Plumbing maintained in good working order [Cal. Civ. Code ( 1941.1(a)(2); Cal. Health 12 gr Safety Code $ 17920.3(e)]; 13 b. A water supply capable of producing hot and cold running water [Cal. Civ. Code t) 14 1941.1(a)(3) CaL Health gr Safety Code ti 17920.3(5)]; 15 c. Electrical lighting, with wiring and electrical equipment maintained in good working 16 order [Cal. Civ. Code ) 1941.1(a) (5); CaL Health ere Safety Code $ 17920.3(a)(10); Cal. 17 Health gr Safety Code $ 17920.3(d)]; 18 The following CONDITIONS existed at the SUBJECT PROPERTY to an extent that 19 endangered life, limb, health, property, safety or welfare of the PLAINTIFF: 20 d. Visible mold growth constituting a nuisance [Cal. Health gc Safety Code $ 17920.3(c)]; 21 e. Infestation of insects constituting a nuisance [Cal. Health gr Safety Code $ 17920.3(c)]; 22 10. During her tenancy at the SUBJECT PROPERTY, PLAINTIFF repeatedly notified 23 DEFENDANTS in person of the CONDITIONS and requested repairs and remediation. 24 11. For example, on or around January 2020, PLAINTIFF noticed a cockroach infestation in 25 the SUBJECT PROPERTY. PLAINTIFF immediately notified DEFENDANTS in person 26 and requested pest control. DEFENDANTS gave PLAINTIFF sticky traps and an 27 exterminator came to the unit. This was not enough to abate the infestation and it continued 28 to get worse. PLAINTIFF reported to DEFENDANTS on a monthly basis. COMPLAINT — page 3 DEFENDANTS continued to give PLAINTIFF sticky ttaps but did not properly address the infestation, which continued to worsen throughout the next few years. The infestation was so bad that PIAINTIFF had a cockroach in her ear and started sleeping in her car for a period of time. 12. PLAINTIFF experienced extreme emotional distress due to the infestation and notified DEFEDNANTS through letters from doctors dated December 2021 and April 2023 as well as a request for new accommodations that mentioned both the cockroach in her ear and the fact that she was sleeping in her car. 13. Since the beginning of her tenancy at the SUBJECT PROPERTY, PLAINTIFF experienced 10 other inhabitable conditions such as mold in the bathtub, water leaks, lack of hot water, and exposed wiring. PLAINITFF notified DEFENDANTS of the CONDITIONS, but no 12 repairs were made. 13 14. On or around February 2020, the San Francisco Department of Building Inspection sent a 14 notice of violation to DEFFNDANTS regarding a broken elevator. 15 15. Despite repeated notifications of the CONDITIONS, DEFENDANTS refused to perform 16 the necessary repairs and remediation, placing the health and safety of PLAINTIFF at risk. 17 16. Frustrated with DEFENDANTS'efusal to remediate the CONDITIONS, PIAINTIFF 18 moved out of the SUBJECT PROPERTY on or around January 9, 2024. 19 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 20 BREACH OF CONTRACT 21 ( By All Plaintiffs and Against All Defendants ) 22 17. PLAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in 23 the preceding paragraphs of the complaint as though set forth fully herein. 24 18. PLAINTIFF entered into a written rental contract with the DEFENDANTS to rent the 25 SUBJECT PROPERTY. Attached as Exhibit 1 is a copy of the written rental contract. 19. PLAINTIFF did all, or substantially all, of the significant thmgs that the contract required 27 them to do. 28 COMPLAINT — page 4 20. All rental contracts in the State of California contain an imphed warranty of habitability as part of the rental contract. DEFENDANTS breached the implied warranty of habitability by allowing the substandard CONDITIONS described in this complaint to persist and by not remediating the CONDITIONS in a reasonable and tunely manner. 21. As a result of the DEFENDANTS'reach the PLAINTIFF was harmed. 22. DEFENDANTS'reach of the rental contract was a substantial factor in causmg 7 PLAINTIFF'S harm. 23. As a chrect and proximate result of the acts and omissions of DEFENDANTS, PLAINTIFF incurred and continues to incur special damages m amounts according to proof at trial. 10 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF HABITABILITY 12 ( By All Plaintiffs and Against All Defendants ) 13 24. PLAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in 14 the preceding paragraphs of the complaint as though set forth fully herein. 15 25. PLAINTIFF aiieges this cause of actton both in contract and tort. 16 26. DEFENDANTS had and have actual notice of the CONDITIONS. 17 27. DEFENDANTS breached the imphed warranty of habitability by allowing the substandard 18 CONDITIONS described in 0 ds complaint to persist and by not remediating the 19 CONDITIONS in a reasonable and timely manner. 20 28. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS'reach of the implied warranty of 21 habitability, PIAINTIFF suffered and continues to suffer general and special damages in 22 amounts according to proof at trial. 23 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 24 NUISANCE 25 ( By All Plaintiffs and Against All Defendants ) 26 29. PLAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in 27 the preceding paragraphs of the complaint as though set forth fully herein. 28 COMPLAINT — page 5 30. At all times relevant herein the PLAINTIFF rented and occupied the SUBJECT PROPERTY. 31. DEFENDANTS actions and omissions in allowing the substandard CONDITIONS described in this complaint to persist and by not remediating the CONDITIONS in a reasonable and timely manner was harmful to PLAINTIFF'S health, offensive to PLAINTIFF'S senses, and interfered with PLAINTIFF'S use and comfortable enjoyment of the SUBJECT PROPERTY. As such the CONDITIONS as described in this complaint constituted a nuisance as set forth in Cal. Civ. Code it,.3479. 32. DEFENDANTS'llowing of the CONDITIONS to persist was intentional, unreasonable 10 and/or reckless and constituted conscious disregard for the health and safety of the PLAINTIFF. 12 33. The CONDITIONS substantially interfered with PLAINTII'F'S use and enjoyment of the 13 SUBJECT PROPF RTY. 14 34. An ordinary person would reasonably be annoyed by the DEFENDANTS'onduct in 15 allowing the CONDITIONS to persist without timely and reasonable remediation. In fact, 16 PLAINTIFF was annoyed by the DEFENDANTS'onduct in allowing the CONDITIONS 17 to persist without timely and reasonable remediation. 18 35. PLAINTIFF did not consent to DEFENDANTS'onduct m allowing the CONDITIONS 19 to persist without timely and reasonable remediation. 20 36. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS'ailure to abate the nutsance at the 21 SUBJFCT PROPERTY the PLAINTIFF suffered and continues to suffer general and 22 special damages in amounts according to proof at trial. 23 37. DEFENDANTS'ctions were oppressive and malicious within the meaning of Cal. Civ. 24 Code iS 3294 in that they have intentionally, and in conscious disregard for health and safety, 25 subjected the PLAINTIFF to cruel and unjust hardship by causing them to unreasonably 26 live with the substandard and dangerous CONDITIONS at the SUBJECT PROPERTY 27 thereby entitling the PLAINTIFF to an a~ard of punitive damages. 28 DEFENDANTS'OMPLAINT — page 6 actions constituting malice and oppression were authorized by an offtcer, director, or a managing agent of DEFENDANTS. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENCE ( By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants ) 38. PIAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in the preceding paragraphs oE the complaint as though set forth fully herein. 39. At all times mentioned herein DEFENDANTS owned, managed, maintained, leased, and operated the SUBJECT PROPERTY. 10 40. PLAINTIFF was a tenant and occupant of the SUBJECT PROPERTY. 41. As landlords and or owners of the SUBJECT PROPERTY the DEFENDANTS owed a duty of care for the safety and well-being oE PLAINTIFF by safely managing and 13 maintaining the SUBJECT PROPERTY in a safe condition for residents, tenants and/or 14 invitees such as PLAINTIFF. 15 42. DEFENDANTS breached the duty of care by allowing the CONDITIONS to persist at the 16 SUBJECT PROPERTY without reasonable and timely remediation. 17 43. DEEFNDANTS knew or should have known that its negligent maintenance of the 18 SUBJECT PROPER1Y would cause injury and demonstrated a conscious drsregard for the 19 health and safety of the PLAINTIFF. 20 44. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS'egligence PLAINTIFF has suffered 21 and continues to suffer general and special damages in amounts according to proof at trraL 22 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 23 INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 24 (By All Plaintiffs and Against All Defendants) 25 45. PLAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in 26 the preceding paragraphs of the complaint as though set forth fully herein. 27 46. DEFENDANTS'onduct was extreme, outrageous and done with reckless disregard of the 28 fact that it would certainly cause PLAINTIFF to suffer severe emotional distress. COMPLAINT — page 7 47. DEFENDANTS knew or reasonably should have known that their conduct would cause emotional distress and gave httle or no though to the probable effect of their conduct. Specifically, that the following acts and/or omissions would cause severe emotional distress: a. Causing the PLAINTIFF to have to live with the substandard, dangerous and slum CONDITIONS at the SUBJECT PROPERTY for an unreasonable amount of time. b. Disrupting the PLAINTIFFS'bility to sleep due to the severe insect infestation at the SUBJECT PROPER IY. 48. The way that DEFENDANTS had the PLAINTIFF living was reckless, and or malicious, and done for the purpose of causing PLAINTIFF to suffer humiliation, mental anguish, and 10 emotional distress. 49. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS'utrageous conduct PLAINTIFF 12 suffered severe mental and emotional distress. This emotional distress has caused 13 PLAINTIFF to sustain general and special damages in amounts according to proof. 14 50. DEFENDANTS'ctions were oppressive and malicious within the meaning of Cal. Civ. 15 Code ( 3294 in that they have intentionally, and in conscious disregard for health and safety, subjected the PLAINTIFF to cruel and unjust hardship by causing them to unreasonably 17 live with the substandard and dangerous CONDITIONS at the SUBJECT PROPERTY thereby entitling the PLAINTIFF to an award of punitive damages. DEFENDANTS'ctions 19 constituting mahce and oppression were authorized by an officer, director, or a 20 managing agent of DEFENDANTS. 21 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION 22 WRONGFUL EVICTION 23 (By All Plaintiffs and Against All Defendants) 24 51. PLAINTIFF hereby alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation stated in 25 the preceding paragraphs of the complaint as though set forth fully herein. 26 52. As tenants and residents at the SUBJECT PROPERTY the PLAINTIFF had legal rights and 27 privdcges to use and enjoyment of the SUBJECT PROPFRTY. 28 COMPLAINT — page 8 53. DEFENDANTS substantially interfered with PLAINTIFF'S use and enjoyment of the SUBJECT PROPERTY by doing the following; a. Allowing the CONDITIONS to persist at the SUBJECT PROPERTY without reasonable and timely remediation. 54. Due to the conduct alleged herein the PLAINTIFF was forced to vacate the SUBJECT PROPERTY on or about January 9, 2024. 55. As a direct and proximate result of DEFENDANTS'onduct, PLAINTIFF has suffered and continues to suffer general and special damages in amounts according to proof at trial. 56. DEFENDANTS'ctions were oppressive and malicious within the meaning of Cal. Civ. 10 Code ( 3294 in that they have intentionaHy and/or recklessly caused the PLAINTIFF to be evicted from the SUBJECT PROPERTY thereby entitling the PI&INTIFF to an award of 12 punitive damages. DEFENDANTS'ctions constituting malice and oppression were 13 authorized by an officer, director, or a managing agent of DEFENDANTS. 14 15 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as follou-s: 16 1. For general damages in an amount not less than $ 250,000; 17 2. For special damages in an amount not less than $ 100,000; 18 3. For punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial; 19 4. For statutory damages in an amount not less than $ 50,000; 20 5. For pre- and post-judgment interest„ 6. For reasonable attorney's fees and costs; 22 7. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. 23 24 Dated: "th)+ Respectfully Submitted, 25 Nielsen, Peterson g: Nielsen 26 27 Jonathan Nielsen 28 Attorney for Plamtiffs COMPLAINT — page 9 P 0 P P I I P II ~ * +, ~ ~et&~ *='e; /' 3 ~e @~'pr~ ~ f~ .'-' p. g'$ w.P ' Aj! k " ='4~j~44 ~