Preview
MOA A
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Oct-26-2010 9:42 am
Case Number: CUD-10-634600
Filing Date: Oct-25-2010 9:42
Juke Box: 001 Image: 03012941
ANSWER
SHU YING WONG et al VS. JOEL TORRES et al
001003012941
Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name and Address) TELEPHONE NO:
| JOEL TORRES and VILMA TORRES (gved as\\ lam) (415) 368-8947
910 Plymouth Avenue, Upstairs
San Francisco, CA 94112 FILE
Superior Spy of of Califo
ATorNey For (wane: Defendants in pro. per.
wwueor cover, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, S.F. COUNTY OCT 2.5 2010
street aooress: 400 McAllister Street, Room 103
MALLING ADDRESS, OLERK OF THE Coul
cry anoze cove’ San Francisco, CA 94102 &.
erancuname: Limited Jurisdiction Boe
puaintirF: SHU YING ZHOU WONG, etal.
cerenpant: JOEL TORRES, et al.
‘CASE NUM
ANSWER—Unlawful Detainer Cube l0- Ta RRRS
1. Defendant (names): Joel Torres And Vilma Torres (sued aS lave)
answers the complaint as follows:
2. Check ONLY ONE of the next two boxes:
a. [__] 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 all 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):
6, 7, 8, 16, 11,14
[) 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 complaint or explain):
2,4,5
[J 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. (X) (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.
ce. [] (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. 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. [) 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. [x] Plaintiffs demand for possession violates the local rent control or eviction control ordinance of (city or county, title
of ordinances, and date of passage): San Francisco Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration
Ordinance, June 1979, as amended
(Also, briefly state the facts showing violation of the ordinance in item 3j.)
h. [[] Plaintiff accepted rent from defendant to cover a period of time after the date the notice to quit expired.
i. (1 Other affirmative defenses are stated in item 3).
Page 1 of 2
certs Surin ANSWER—Unlawful Detainer cnt ra rece 818
LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council FormsUD-106
PLAINTIFF (Name): SHU YING ZHOU WONG, etal. CASE NUMBER,
DEFENDANT (Name): JOEL TORRES, et al. CUD-10-634600
3. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES (cont'd)
j. Facts supporting affirmative defenses checked above (identify each item separately by its letter from page one):
(1) [3C] All the facts are stated in Attachment 3}. (2) £1) Facts are continued in Attachment 3j.
4. OTHER STATEMENTS
a. [_] Defendant vacates the premises on (date):
b. [3c] The fair rental value of the premises alleged in the complaint is excessive (explain):
due to the above defects
co. Cx] Other (specify):
Defendant requests credit for security deposit plus interest in an amount according to proof.
5. DEFENDANT REQUESTS
that plaintiff take nothing requested in the complaint.
b. costs incurred in this proceeding.
c. [x] reasonable attorney fees.
d. [3] 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.
[x] 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 completed in ail cases) An unlawful detainer assistant [X] didnot [(_] did for compensation give advice or
assistance with this form. (if defendant has received any heip 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):
»
JOEL TORRES
(IVPE OR PRINT NAMED {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATT
VILMA TORRES >
(TYPE OR PRINT NAMED {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OF A]
(Each defendant for whom this answer is filed must be named in item 1 and must sign this answer unless or her attomey signs.)
VERIFICATION
(Use a different verification form if the verification is by an attorney or for a corporation or partnership. )
lam the defendant in this proceeding and have read this answer. | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
Califomia that the foregoing is true and correct. Date:October 25, 2010 a
JOEL TORRES » ul (en
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME {SIGNATURE OF DEFENOANT)
1Y0-106 [Rev. January 1, 2007] ANSWER—Unlawful Detainer Page 2012
LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Formseo men Au bk YD NY =
»b NY NY NN N NN FEF = S&S SOS Oe eee
Snr DA mH HO YEH SSC DHA KAU RB WN SB S
Attachment 33
CASE NAME: WONG, et al. v. TORRES, et al.
CASE NO.: CUD-10~634600
3a. Defects exist at the premises including, but not limited to,
the following: missing smoke detectors; unsafe stairways/railings.
Plaintiff has had actual and/or constructive notice of the defects
but has failed to make needed repairs.
3g. The subject premises are subject to the San Francisco
Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance and
Plaintiff has failed to comply with the requirements of the Rent
Ordinance in ways that include but are not limited to the
following: services have been decreased without a corresponding
decrease in rent.
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.
(2) Plaintiff is estopped by conduct and/or statements from seeking
possession.
(3) Plaintiff has waived the right to strict enforcement of the
alleged covenant to pay rent by the third of each month.CoC renrn nu & WY N =
Nv NY NY NY NY NR NN NOS Se SF SF SS eS Sl Se
Cond D mM Rw NY SB SE DATA KN & WH N = S
JOEL TORRES, VILMA TORRES (sued OS Velava)
910 Plymouth Avenue, Upstairs
San Francisco, CA 94112
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL
CASE NAME: WONG, et al. v. TORRES, et al.
CASE NO.: CUD-10-634600
I, Aeavon Momnrio~
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.
, declare as follows:
On October 25, 2010, in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1013a (3), I served the following:
_Misuer and Jury Demand
upon PLAINTIFFS SHU YING ZHOU WONG and KALVIN C. WONG, 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:
Edward A. Nagy
510 3rd Street Suite 101
Oakland, CA 94607
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 declaration was executed on October 25,
2010 at San Francisco, California. Jn —
Proof of Service by Mail
Preview
MOA A SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Oct-26-2010 9:42 am Case Number: CUD-10-634600 Filing Date: Oct-25-2010 9:42 Juke Box: 001 Image: 03012941 ANSWER SHU YING WONG et al VS. JOEL TORRES et al 001003012941 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name and Address) TELEPHONE NO: | JOEL TORRES and VILMA TORRES (gved as\\ lam) (415) 368-8947 910 Plymouth Avenue, Upstairs San Francisco, CA 94112 FILE Superior Spy of of Califo ATorNey For (wane: Defendants in pro. per. wwueor cover, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, S.F. COUNTY OCT 2.5 2010 street aooress: 400 McAllister Street, Room 103 MALLING ADDRESS, OLERK OF THE Coul cry anoze cove’ San Francisco, CA 94102 &. erancuname: Limited Jurisdiction Boe puaintirF: SHU YING ZHOU WONG, etal. cerenpant: JOEL TORRES, et al. ‘CASE NUM ANSWER—Unlawful Detainer Cube l0- Ta RRRS 1. Defendant (names): Joel Torres And Vilma Torres (sued aS lave) answers the complaint as follows: 2. Check ONLY ONE of the next two boxes: a. [__] 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 all 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): 6, 7, 8, 16, 11,14 [) 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 complaint or explain): 2,4,5 [J 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. (X) (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. ce. [] (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. 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. [) 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. [x] Plaintiffs demand for possession violates the local rent control or eviction control ordinance of (city or county, title of ordinances, and date of passage): San Francisco Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance, June 1979, as amended (Also, briefly state the facts showing violation of the ordinance in item 3j.) h. [[] Plaintiff accepted rent from defendant to cover a period of time after the date the notice to quit expired. i. (1 Other affirmative defenses are stated in item 3). Page 1 of 2 certs Surin ANSWER—Unlawful Detainer cnt ra rece 818 LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council FormsUD-106 PLAINTIFF (Name): SHU YING ZHOU WONG, etal. CASE NUMBER, DEFENDANT (Name): JOEL TORRES, et al. CUD-10-634600 3. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES (cont'd) j. Facts supporting affirmative defenses checked above (identify each item separately by its letter from page one): (1) [3C] All the facts are stated in Attachment 3}. (2) £1) Facts are continued in Attachment 3j. 4. OTHER STATEMENTS a. [_] Defendant vacates the premises on (date): b. [3c] The fair rental value of the premises alleged in the complaint is excessive (explain): due to the above defects co. Cx] Other (specify): Defendant requests credit for security deposit plus interest in an amount according to proof. 5. DEFENDANT REQUESTS that plaintiff take nothing requested in the complaint. b. costs incurred in this proceeding. c. [x] reasonable attorney fees. d. [3] 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. [x] 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 completed in ail cases) An unlawful detainer assistant [X] didnot [(_] did for compensation give advice or assistance with this form. (if defendant has received any heip 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): » JOEL TORRES (IVPE OR PRINT NAMED {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATT VILMA TORRES > (TYPE OR PRINT NAMED {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OF A] (Each defendant for whom this answer is filed must be named in item 1 and must sign this answer unless or her attomey signs.) VERIFICATION (Use a different verification form if the verification is by an attorney or for a corporation or partnership. ) lam the defendant in this proceeding and have read this answer. | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Califomia that the foregoing is true and correct. Date:October 25, 2010 a JOEL TORRES » ul (en (TYPE OR PRINT NAME {SIGNATURE OF DEFENOANT) 1Y0-106 [Rev. January 1, 2007] ANSWER—Unlawful Detainer Page 2012 LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Formseo men Au bk YD NY = »b NY NY NN N NN FEF = S&S SOS Oe eee Snr DA mH HO YEH SSC DHA KAU RB WN SB S Attachment 33 CASE NAME: WONG, et al. v. TORRES, et al. CASE NO.: CUD-10~634600 3a. Defects exist at the premises including, but not limited to, the following: missing smoke detectors; unsafe stairways/railings. Plaintiff has had actual and/or constructive notice of the defects but has failed to make needed repairs. 3g. The subject premises are subject to the San Francisco Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance and Plaintiff has failed to comply with the requirements of the Rent Ordinance in ways that include but are not limited to the following: services have been decreased without a corresponding decrease in rent. 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. (2) Plaintiff is estopped by conduct and/or statements from seeking possession. (3) Plaintiff has waived the right to strict enforcement of the alleged covenant to pay rent by the third of each month.CoC renrn nu & WY N = Nv NY NY NY NY NR NN NOS Se SF SF SS eS Sl Se Cond D mM Rw NY SB SE DATA KN & WH N = S JOEL TORRES, VILMA TORRES (sued OS Velava) 910 Plymouth Avenue, Upstairs San Francisco, CA 94112 PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL CASE NAME: WONG, et al. v. TORRES, et al. CASE NO.: CUD-10-634600 I, Aeavon Momnrio~ 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. , declare as follows: On October 25, 2010, in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure Section 1013a (3), I served the following: _Misuer and Jury Demand upon PLAINTIFFS SHU YING ZHOU WONG and KALVIN C. WONG, 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: Edward A. Nagy 510 3rd Street Suite 101 Oakland, CA 94607 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 declaration was executed on October 25, 2010 at San Francisco, California. Jn — Proof of Service by Mail