Preview
NICO
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Apr-03-2012 3:22 pm
Case Number: CUD-12-640954
Filing Date: Apr-03-2012 3:22
Filed by: ROSSALY DELAVEGA
Juke Box: 001 image: 03560879
ANSWER
instructions:
JOHN STEWART COMPANY VS. FATIMA ROLLINS et al
001C03560879
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.UD-105
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name and Address): TELEPHONE NO. FOR COURT USE ONLY
| FATIMA ROLLINS (415) 424-5351
175 Sixth Street, #311
San Francisco, CA 94103 —
ATTORNEY FOR (name FATIMA ROLLINS, Defendant _ in pro. per. caferae County Superior Cour
name or court. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, S.F. COUNTY .
streetaooress; 400 McAllister Street, Room 103 AAR 03 2012
MAILING ADDRESS:
enrvano zcooe: San Francisco 94102 CLERKOF THE COURT
arancu nave: Limited Jurisdiction ey. Clark
piantire: JOHN STEWART COMPANY
perencant; FATIMA ROLLINS, et al.
CASE NUMBER:
CUD-12-640954
ANSWER—Unlawful Detainer
4. Defendant (names): Fatima Rollins
answers the complaint as follows:
2. Check ONLY ONE of the next two boxes:
a. [3X] Defendant generally denies each statement of the complaint. (Do not check this box if the complaint demands more
than $1,000.
b. Defendant admits that alt of the statements of the complaint are true EXCEPT
(1) Defendant claims the following statements of the complaint are false (use paragraph numbers from the complaint
or explain):
Continued on Attachment 2b (1).
(2) Defendant has no information or belief that the following statements of the complaint are true, so defendant denies
them (use paragraph numbers from the camplaint or explain):
Continued on Attachment 2b (2).
3. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES (NOTE: For each box checked, you must state brief facts to support it in the space provided at
the top of page two (item 3))).
a (nonpayment of rent only) Plaintiff has breached the warranty to provide habitable premises.
b. (nonpayment of rent only) Defendant made needed repairs and properly deducted the cost from the rent, and plaintiff did
not give proper credit.
C. (nonpayment of rent only) On (date): before the notice to pay or quit expired, defendant
offered the rent due but plaintiff would not accept it.
d. [X_] Plaintiff waived, changed, or canceled the notice to quit.
e. Plaintiff served defendant with the notice to quit or filed the complaint to retaliate against defendant.
f. x By serving defendant with the notice to quit or filing the complaint, plaintiff is arbitrarily discriminating against the
defendant in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or California.
g. [0] Plaintiff's demand for possession violates the local rent control or eviction control ordinance of (city or county, tile
of ordinance, and date of passage): San Francisco Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration
Ordinance, June 1979, as amended “Lf appliqa lw).
(Also, briefly state the facts showing violation of the ordinance in item 3j.)
h. [X] Plaintiff accepted rent from defendant to cover a period of time after the date the notice to quit expired.
i. [XJ Other affirmative defenses are stated in item 3]
Page 10f2
Form Approved by the Judicial ' Civil Code, §1940 el seq;
tet ams ANSWER—Unlawful Detainer code of Ga Prosotre 425.58
UD-105 [Rev. January 1,2007] www courtinfo.ca.gav
LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Forms:UD-105
(PLAINTIFE (Name). JOHN STEWART COMPANY ASE nee
DEFENDANT (Name): FATIMA ROLLINS, et al. CUD-12-640954
3, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES (cont'd)
j. Facts supporting affirmative defenses checked above (identify each item separately by its letter fram page one):
(1) [XC] All the facts are stated in Attachment 3). (2) Facts are continued in Attachment 3j.
4. OTHER STATEMENTS
a, Defendant vacated the premises on (date):
b. [Xx] The fair rental value of the premises alleged in the complaint is excessive (explain):
due to the above defects and breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment
c. LX] Other (specify):
Defendant requests credit for security deposit plus
interest in an amount according to proof.
5. DEFENDANT REQUESTS
a. that plaintiff take nothing requested in the complaint.
b. costs incurred in this proceeding.
¢. [-_] reasonable attorney fees.
d. [xX ]_ that plaintiff be ordered to (1) make repairs and correct the conditions that constitute a breach of the warranty to provide
habitable premises and (2) reduce the monthly rent to a reasonable rental value until the conditions are corrected.
e. LX] Other (specify):
such other relief as the Court deems just and proper
6. [x _] Number of pages attached (specify): 1
UNLAWFUL DETAINER ASSISTANT (Business and Professions Code sections 6400- 6415)
7. (Must be compieted in ail cases) An unlawtul detainer assistant LX_] did not did for compensation give advice or
assistance with this form. (if defendant has received any help or advice for pay from an unlawful detainer assistant, state:
a. Assistant's name: b. Telephone No.:
c. Street address, city, and ZIP:
d. County of registration e. Registration No.: f. Expires on (date):
FATIMA ROLLINS >
CTYPE OR PRINT NAKE) {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATTORNEY)
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME; {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATTORNEY)
(Each defendant for whom this answer is filed must be named in item 1 and must sign this answer unless his or her attorney signs.)
VERIFICATION
(Use a different verification form if the verification is by an attorney or for a corporation or partnership. )
| am the defendant in this proceeding and have read this answer. | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
California that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: April 3, 2012
FATIMA ROLLINS » ABE FL :
(TYPEOR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT)
‘UD-105 [Rev. January 1, 2007] ANSWER—Unlawtul Detainer Page2 of 2
LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council FarmsCreat DA ee WN =
NY RY YM NY NN NR NR mmm ee ee
SAND HF HW NY BF SES BAIA HM B® wBW NY & SS
Attachment 33
CASE NAME: JOHN STEWART COMPANY v. ROLLINS
CASE NO.: CUD-12-640954
3d. Plaintiff waived or changed or canceled the notice to quit
through conduct and acceptance of rent.
3g. If the subject premises are subject to the San Francisco
Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance, Plaintiff
has failed to comply with the requirements of the Rent Ordinance in
ways that include but are not limited to the following:
Plaintiff's dominant motive is not one allowed by the Rent
Ordinance, services have been decreased without a corresponding
decrease in rent, the rent was possibly increased unlawfully.
3h. On or about April 2, 2012, Plaintiff accepted a payment for
$1006 from Defendant’s payee by check to cover rent for a period of
time after the notice expired. The payment was not returned.
3i. Other
(1) Plaintiff has not performed his obligations under the rental
agreement in ways that include, but are not limited to the
following: breached the warranty of habitability by not making
needed repairs.
Defects exist at the premises including, but not limited to,
the following: infestation of rodents, cockroaches, insects;
missing or defective smoke detectors; no secure mail receptacle.
Plaintiff has had actual and/or constructive notice of the defects
but has failed to make needed repairs.
(2) The complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to state a cause
of action.
(3) Plaintiff is estopped by conduct and/or statements from seeking
possession.
(4) Plaintiff has waived the right to strict enforcement of the
covenant alleged to have been violated.
3F, (tient eed vo NOL ty Beioninaning aQAhnge Delerdend}
ebisaleihi.eo PADD UH BR WD Ym
YN BY HM NY RD NO mm meet
SrA nk WN EK SOC Dmx DAH PR WY & SO
FATIMA ROLLINS
175 Sixth Street, #311
San Francisco, CA 94103
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL
CASE NAME: JOHN STEWART COMPANY v. ROLLINS, et al.
CASE NO.: CUD-12-640954
1, arg Terese cero , declare as follows:
I am employed within the City and County of San Francisco. My
business address is EVICTION DEFENSE COLLABORATIVE, 995 Market
Street, #1200, San Francisco, California 94103. I am over the age
of eighteen (18) years of age and not a party to the within action.
I am readily familiar with the EVICTION DEFENSE COLLABORATIVE's
practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing
with the United States Postal Service. Correspondence so collected
and processed is deposited with the United States Postal Service that
same day in the ordinary course of business.
On April, 3, 2012, in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure
a (3), I served the following:
and Jury Demand
upon PLAINTIFF JOHN STEWART COMPANY , by placing the same at the
EVICTION DEFENSE COLLABORATIVE for deposit in the United States
Postal Service on that date in an envelope addressed as follows:
Francisco Torres
703 Market Street, Suite 1600
San Francisco, CA 94103
I sealed the envelope and placed it for collection and mailing on
that date following ordinary business practices, in the City and
County of San Francisco, California.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
and correct and that this declaratién Was executed on April 012
at San Francisco, California.
Proof of Service by Mail
Preview
NICO SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Apr-03-2012 3:22 pm Case Number: CUD-12-640954 Filing Date: Apr-03-2012 3:22 Filed by: ROSSALY DELAVEGA Juke Box: 001 image: 03560879 ANSWER instructions: JOHN STEWART COMPANY VS. FATIMA ROLLINS et al 001C03560879 Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.UD-105 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name and Address): TELEPHONE NO. FOR COURT USE ONLY | FATIMA ROLLINS (415) 424-5351 175 Sixth Street, #311 San Francisco, CA 94103 — ATTORNEY FOR (name FATIMA ROLLINS, Defendant _ in pro. per. caferae County Superior Cour name or court. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, S.F. COUNTY . streetaooress; 400 McAllister Street, Room 103 AAR 03 2012 MAILING ADDRESS: enrvano zcooe: San Francisco 94102 CLERKOF THE COURT arancu nave: Limited Jurisdiction ey. Clark piantire: JOHN STEWART COMPANY perencant; FATIMA ROLLINS, et al. CASE NUMBER: CUD-12-640954 ANSWER—Unlawful Detainer 4. Defendant (names): Fatima Rollins answers the complaint as follows: 2. Check ONLY ONE of the next two boxes: a. [3X] Defendant generally denies each statement of the complaint. (Do not check this box if the complaint demands more than $1,000. b. Defendant admits that alt of the statements of the complaint are true EXCEPT (1) Defendant claims the following statements of the complaint are false (use paragraph numbers from the complaint or explain): Continued on Attachment 2b (1). (2) Defendant has no information or belief that the following statements of the complaint are true, so defendant denies them (use paragraph numbers from the camplaint or explain): Continued on Attachment 2b (2). 3. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES (NOTE: For each box checked, you must state brief facts to support it in the space provided at the top of page two (item 3))). a (nonpayment of rent only) Plaintiff has breached the warranty to provide habitable premises. b. (nonpayment of rent only) Defendant made needed repairs and properly deducted the cost from the rent, and plaintiff did not give proper credit. C. (nonpayment of rent only) On (date): before the notice to pay or quit expired, defendant offered the rent due but plaintiff would not accept it. d. [X_] Plaintiff waived, changed, or canceled the notice to quit. e. Plaintiff served defendant with the notice to quit or filed the complaint to retaliate against defendant. f. x By serving defendant with the notice to quit or filing the complaint, plaintiff is arbitrarily discriminating against the defendant in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or California. g. [0] Plaintiff's demand for possession violates the local rent control or eviction control ordinance of (city or county, tile of ordinance, and date of passage): San Francisco Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance, June 1979, as amended “Lf appliqa lw). (Also, briefly state the facts showing violation of the ordinance in item 3j.) h. [X] Plaintiff accepted rent from defendant to cover a period of time after the date the notice to quit expired. i. [XJ Other affirmative defenses are stated in item 3] Page 10f2 Form Approved by the Judicial ' Civil Code, §1940 el seq; tet ams ANSWER—Unlawful Detainer code of Ga Prosotre 425.58 UD-105 [Rev. January 1,2007] www courtinfo.ca.gav LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Forms:UD-105 (PLAINTIFE (Name). JOHN STEWART COMPANY ASE nee DEFENDANT (Name): FATIMA ROLLINS, et al. CUD-12-640954 3, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES (cont'd) j. Facts supporting affirmative defenses checked above (identify each item separately by its letter fram page one): (1) [XC] All the facts are stated in Attachment 3). (2) Facts are continued in Attachment 3j. 4. OTHER STATEMENTS a, Defendant vacated the premises on (date): b. [Xx] The fair rental value of the premises alleged in the complaint is excessive (explain): due to the above defects and breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment c. LX] Other (specify): Defendant requests credit for security deposit plus interest in an amount according to proof. 5. DEFENDANT REQUESTS a. that plaintiff take nothing requested in the complaint. b. costs incurred in this proceeding. ¢. [-_] reasonable attorney fees. d. [xX ]_ that plaintiff be ordered to (1) make repairs and correct the conditions that constitute a breach of the warranty to provide habitable premises and (2) reduce the monthly rent to a reasonable rental value until the conditions are corrected. e. LX] Other (specify): such other relief as the Court deems just and proper 6. [x _] Number of pages attached (specify): 1 UNLAWFUL DETAINER ASSISTANT (Business and Professions Code sections 6400- 6415) 7. (Must be compieted in ail cases) An unlawtul detainer assistant LX_] did not did for compensation give advice or assistance with this form. (if defendant has received any help or advice for pay from an unlawful detainer assistant, state: a. Assistant's name: b. Telephone No.: c. Street address, city, and ZIP: d. County of registration e. Registration No.: f. Expires on (date): FATIMA ROLLINS > CTYPE OR PRINT NAKE) {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATTORNEY) (TYPE OR PRINT NAME; {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATTORNEY) (Each defendant for whom this answer is filed must be named in item 1 and must sign this answer unless his or her attorney signs.) VERIFICATION (Use a different verification form if the verification is by an attorney or for a corporation or partnership. ) | am the defendant in this proceeding and have read this answer. | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: April 3, 2012 FATIMA ROLLINS » ABE FL : (TYPEOR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT) ‘UD-105 [Rev. January 1, 2007] ANSWER—Unlawtul Detainer Page2 of 2 LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council FarmsCreat DA ee WN = NY RY YM NY NN NR NR mmm ee ee SAND HF HW NY BF SES BAIA HM B® wBW NY & SS Attachment 33 CASE NAME: JOHN STEWART COMPANY v. ROLLINS CASE NO.: CUD-12-640954 3d. Plaintiff waived or changed or canceled the notice to quit through conduct and acceptance of rent. 3g. If the subject premises are subject to the San Francisco Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance, Plaintiff has failed to comply with the requirements of the Rent Ordinance in ways that include but are not limited to the following: Plaintiff's dominant motive is not one allowed by the Rent Ordinance, services have been decreased without a corresponding decrease in rent, the rent was possibly increased unlawfully. 3h. On or about April 2, 2012, Plaintiff accepted a payment for $1006 from Defendant’s payee by check to cover rent for a period of time after the notice expired. The payment was not returned. 3i. Other (1) Plaintiff has not performed his obligations under the rental agreement in ways that include, but are not limited to the following: breached the warranty of habitability by not making needed repairs. Defects exist at the premises including, but not limited to, the following: infestation of rodents, cockroaches, insects; missing or defective smoke detectors; no secure mail receptacle. Plaintiff has had actual and/or constructive notice of the defects but has failed to make needed repairs. (2) The complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to state a cause of action. (3) Plaintiff is estopped by conduct and/or statements from seeking possession. (4) Plaintiff has waived the right to strict enforcement of the covenant alleged to have been violated. 3F, (tient eed vo NOL ty Beioninaning aQAhnge Delerdend} ebisaleihi.eo PADD UH BR WD Ym YN BY HM NY RD NO mm meet SrA nk WN EK SOC Dmx DAH PR WY & SO FATIMA ROLLINS 175 Sixth Street, #311 San Francisco, CA 94103 PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL CASE NAME: JOHN STEWART COMPANY v. ROLLINS, et al. CASE NO.: CUD-12-640954 1, arg Terese cero , declare as follows: I am employed within the City and County of San Francisco. My business address is EVICTION DEFENSE COLLABORATIVE, 995 Market Street, #1200, San Francisco, California 94103. I am over the age of eighteen (18) years of age and not a party to the within action. I am readily familiar with the EVICTION DEFENSE COLLABORATIVE's practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Correspondence so collected and processed is deposited with the United States Postal Service that same day in the ordinary course of business. On April, 3, 2012, in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure a (3), I served the following: and Jury Demand upon PLAINTIFF JOHN STEWART COMPANY , by placing the same at the EVICTION DEFENSE COLLABORATIVE for deposit in the United States Postal Service on that date in an envelope addressed as follows: Francisco Torres 703 Market Street, Suite 1600 San Francisco, CA 94103 I sealed the envelope and placed it for collection and mailing on that date following ordinary business practices, in the City and County of San Francisco, California. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaratién Was executed on April 012 at San Francisco, California. Proof of Service by Mail