Preview
eFiled 5/2/2024 5:13:57 PM Superior Court of the District of Columbi: Superior Court of the District of Columbia Civil Division Landlord and Tenant Branch - 510 4th St NW, Building B, Room 110, Washington DC 20001 202-879-4879 dccourts.gov | 2024-LTB-004781 Case NumberNew Savannah Preservation Partners, LLC Taijai Alexander, Alicia Fields Plaintiff(s) vs. Defendant(s)8300 Greensboro Drive Suite L1-810 3330 13th Street, SE #101 Address (no ost office boxes) Address VA 02 Washington, DC 20032 City, State, Zip Code City, State, Zip Code202-466-8001 Phone Number Phone NumberMark@dclandlordlaw.com Email Address Email Address VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR POSSESSION OF REAL PROPERTY -- FORM 1A (Nonpayment of Rent - Residential Property) | . Basis for Complaint 1 . | , Mark R. Raddatz, upon information provided by the client, swear or affirm, under penalties of perjury that have | knowledge of the facts set forth in this Complaint. | am: O Plaintiff, or @ Plaintiffs attorney, or 0 Plaintiff's agent authorized to make this verification and my relationship to Plaintiff is (explain, and if Plaintiff is a corporation, include your title): 2. Plaintiff: is the Landlord or Owner, or has been appointed Personal Representative of the Estate in Case Number and Is authorized to take possession of the property, or 1 is not the Landlord, Owner, or Personal Representative, but has the right to possession because (explain): 3. The Property is registered with the Rental Accommodations Division: M yes 0 no The Registration Number is: 22000008 or the Exemption Number is: 4, Plaintiff has a current Basic Business License for the Property: yes 0 no The License Number Is: 500123000008 Active date 09.01.2022 , , and the Expiration date is: 08.31.2024 or Plaintiff has no current Basic Business License because (explain): 5. Plaintiff has other pending landlord and tenant case(s) against Defendant In Landlord and Tenant Court a yes ino. If yes, the name and case number for the pending case(s) are: 6 Plaintiff seeks possession of property located at 3310 13th Street, SE #101 . Washington, D.C. Form 1A Page 1 of 3 Plaintiff alleges: a. Defendant failed to pay $30,271.10, total rent due from 05/2022 03/2024 (month/year) to (month/year). The monthly rent is $1,347.00 Plaintiff seeks fees (do not include fate fees) of $ for - - (explain), defined as rent under paragraph number of the tease for this property, which is not subsidized and is exempt from rent control. (Attach relevant portions of lease and bring to every court date) The total amount due to Plaintiff for rent and other fees listed above (not including late fees) is $ 30,271.10 (tofal amount must be $600 or more). b. Defendant failed to pay the rent owed after being properly served with a written Nonpayment of Rent Notice (Attach copy of Notice and Declaration of Service of the Notice). 7. Is or was the rent for the property subsidized by the federal or local governmen t during at least one of the months listed in section 6(a)? H yes C1 no if the rent is or was subsidized ("yes" to the question above), answer al! of the following: a, What amount of rent, if any, is due from the tenant per month? $_Tax Credit b. What amount of rent, if any, is due from the subsidy program per month? $ Tax Credit c. Is the rent amount alleged due for any month listed in the Complaint over and above the tenant's portion of the rent for that month? 0 yes no * d. Has the subsidy program failed to pay its portion of the rent for any of the months at issue in this case? O yes no e. Has the subsidy program terminated the subsidy? a yes O no Mlunknown 8. Plaintiff seeks a money judgment in the total amount of $ This total includes the rent and fees defined as rent in section 6(a), plus late fees of $ for the month(s) of . Paragraph number of the lease allows late fees of $ per month, which does not exceed 5 percent of the full amount of rent due from the tenant.fl. Relief RequestedTherefore, Plaintiff asks the Court for: (check all that apply) Judgment for possession of the property described and costs taxed by the Clerk. O Money judgment in the total amount of § for rent, fees defined as rent, and late fees. @ A protective order requiring that all future rent be paid into the Court registry until the case is decided. Form 1A Page 2 of 3 APR «9 2024Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 20Notary Public: PlaintifffPlaintiff's Attorney/Plaintiffs Agent: ack Robert Raddatz NO, PUBLIC POTMy commissjof 8 79660 Title of Person Signing (if any): Gg mission Ex bires 7/31/202407.31.202¢4 Attorney For Plaintiff and Tenant Rule 9Important Note to Parties: Court of Appeals Rule 49, Superior Court Rule of Civil Procedure 101, and Landlordprohibit the unauthorized practice of law. Any person who is not a lawyer In good standing in the District of Columbia should be awarethat he or she could be engaging in the unauthorized practice of law if he or she acts on behalf of another in the Landlord and TenantBranch for any purpose other than to request a continuance.Plaintiff / Plaintiff's Attorney / Plaintiffs Agent Name (Print Name):Mark R. Raddatz, Esq. CLERK OF THE COURTAddress:8300 Greensboro Drive Suite L1-810Signatu Costs of this sult to date are: $Mark@delandlordlaw.comTelephone Number: Attorney Bar Number:202-466-8001 468481 Para pedir una traduccién, flame al (202) 879-4828 ARB, Bis (202) 879-4828 Veuillez appeler au (202) 879-4828 pour une traduction cd mot bai dich, hy agi (202) '878-4828 concn noun (202) 879-4828 Doon HA HSA, (202) 879-4928 HEP AAS NOTICE TO DEFENDANTS Please note that you should have received with this Complaint additional forms entitled "Summons to Appear in Court" and "Initial Hearing Notice and Instructions." lf you did not receive these, immediately call the Landlord-Tenant Clerk's Office at 202-879-4879 to learn what date you are required to appear in court to respond to this Complaint. AVISO A LOS DEMANDADOS Sirvanse tomar nota, que junto con la Demanda, deben haber recibido un formulario adicional, titulado "Citatorio para Comparecer en el Juzgado y Aviso de Audiencia'. Si no recibié el Citatorio, llame inmediatamente a la Secretaria de Actas de Arrendadores e Inquilinos, al 202-879-4879 para enterarse de la fecha en que tiene que comparecer ante el Juzgado para contestar esta Demanda. Form 1A Page 3 of 3 Superior Court of the District of Columbia Civil Division Landlord and Tenant Branch - 510 4th St NW, Building B, Room 110, Washington DC 20001 202-879-4879 dccourts.gov | 2024-LTB-004781 Case Number:New Savannah Preservation Partners, LLC Vv. Taijai Alexander, Alicia Fields Plaintiff(s) Defendant(s)8300 Greensboro Drive Suite L1-810 3310 13th Street, SE #101 Street Address (No PO boxes) Street AddressMcLean, VA 22102 Washington, DC 20032 City, State, Zip Code City, State, Zip Code202-466-8001 Mark@dclandlordlaw.com Phone Number Email Address Phone Number (if known) Email Address (if known) SUMMONS TO APPEAR IN COURT The plaintiff has sued to evict you. This paper is summons for you to appear for a hearing on the date and time a listed on the Initial Hearing Notice that you should get with this summons. You do not have to leave your unit unless and until the Court orders you to do so. The complaint states the reason(s) the plaintiff seeks to evict you. The complaint should be attached to this summons. If it is not, you can get a copy In the Landlord and Tenant Clerk's Office at 510 4" Street, Bullding B, Room #110 or by calling the Clerk's Office at (202)879-4879 or you can view It electronical at the Court's online ly court docket at https://www.dccourts.qov/superior-court/cases-online by typing in the case number exactly as it appears on the top of this form, including spaces, zeroes, and capital letters. 1. {f you, or your attorney, do not appear on the date and time listed in the Initial Hearing Notice, you may be evicted without any further court hearings. 2. If you want legal advice or possible representation by an attorney you can call the Landlord Tenant Legal Assistance Network (LTLAN) at (202) 780-2575. LTLAN provides free legal services to tenants with qualifying Incomes. The Court encourages you to call LTLAN as soon as possible and well before your hearing date. Notice to Occupant(s) Not Named on the Summons: If you live on the premises and wish to remain, you must participate in the court hearing even if you are not named as a Defendant on the Summons or Complaint. PLEASE SEE THE BACK OF THIS FORM FOR IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THE CASE. IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT, OR YOUR RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES, PLEASE CONTACT THE LANDLORD TENANT LEGAL ASSISTANCE NETWORK at (202)-780-2575 OR AN ATTORNEY PROMPTLY.Piaintiff/ Petitioner or Attorney Name (Print Name): / AoR.Mark R. Raddatz, Esq, CLERK OF THE COURTAddress: : 8300 Greensboro Drive Suite £1-810 McLean, VA 22102 NGSigna : : Costs of this suit to date ara: $Ema Address: Mark@dclandlordlaw.comTelephone Number: Attorney Bar Number: 202-466-8001 468481 HORE RARE,ASST wa (202) 879-4828 Veuillez appeter au (202) 879-4828 pour une traduction HAs (202) 879-4828 8 HspRA Ale dich, hay goi (202) 879-4828 PATICY HOE (202) 879-4828 BLOM x IMPORTANT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ CAREFULLYYour landlord has sued to evict you. You must participate in each court hearing if you want to try to remain inyour housing unit: do not Attend the hearing even if you think you do not owe any rent or have not violated your lease.-If you or if are late, you may be evicted without any further court hearings. You also may have a participate, you to take some of judgment for money entered against you, and your landlord may be allowed your wages.Read the complaint carefully. Even if your rent is paid in full, the complaint may include reasons other than unpaid rent for your landlord to seek your eviction: The plaintiff may be able to evict you if you do not pay rent that comes due after this complaint was filed. The plaintiff may have a right to evict you if you do not have a 'zero' balance on your rental account on the day of the hearing or, sometimes, if you have paid rent late even if you have a 'zero' balance.Collect all papers relating to your case, and have them with you at every hearing: Examples of papers that relate to your case are: your lease, rent receipts, pictures or anything else that will explain your side of the case to the judge. Also have the complaint and this document available.You and the other side are expected to appear remotely. Instructions for remote participation are on the hearingnotice. However, you may participate in person. If you would like to appear in person, please notify the Court seven days before your hearing.You must connect remotely or come to the courtroom pomptly at the time that your hearing is scheduled: {f you are not present whén your case is called or do no our case is called, a default may be entered gainst you, and the Court may enter a judgment allowing the plaintiff evict youlf you have an emergen and cannot in the hearin on time: Call the Landlord and e 4 rticipate Participate diately at (202876-487 9Persons with disabilities: If you have a disability and you require an accommodation, please call (202) 879-1700.TheCourt does not provide transportation service.Child care: A Child Care Center is in Room C-100 on the lower ((C) level of the Moultrie Courthouse (500 Indiana Ave., NW. You may aiso call (202) 879-1759 or email ChildCareCenter@dcsc.aov for more information.Filing with the Court: Parties may file documents electronically, or by mailing them to the Court at the Landlord and Tenant Branch address listed at the top of this summons, by bringing the documents to the Clerks' Office at the same address, or about electronic placing them in the drop-boxes in the lobby of the Moultrie courthouse or Building B. Information filing is available on the Court's website at https://www.dccourts.qov/superior-court/e-filing. You do not need to be an aitorney to file electronically. ROPE SIF,WHATBB (202) 879-4828 Veuillez appeler au (202) 879-4828 pour une traduction Has FlatAlH, (202) 879-4828 & MSA Alo Décé dich, hay goi (202)879-4828 PATICT FCP ACITT (202) 879-4828 BLO SUPERIOR,COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. :: ... : + CIVIL DIVISION LANDLORD AND.TENANT BRANCH. 510 AthStreet, NW; Room 110, Washington.D.C. 20001. : (202) 879-4879 www.decourts.gov : | SUPPLEMENT TOVERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR POSSESSION OF REALE PROPERTY: FOR NONPAYMENT OF RENTThe Verification in the Complaint applies to this Supplement, which is an attachment-to the: . .Complaint.{ have attached: : Copy of an e-mail from the STAY DC program confirming that an application has beensubmitted on behalf of the housing provider, including the date and application number; Copy of the Notice of Past Due Rent, including any ledger that was included with thatnotice with a completed declaration of service; Copy of the Basic Business License for rental housing; and Copy of the registration or exemption form from the Rental Accommodations Division. If any of the documents listed above is not attached, explain the reason here: Check any box that applies: Y Defendant-owes rent in an amount greater than $600. Defendant(s) failed to submit an emergency rental assistance application within 60 days of receiving a Notice of Past Due Rent. Defendant's application for emergency rental assistance was denied and Defendant has not established a rent payment plan pursuant to D.C. Code, 42-3192.01 within 14 days of the denial. : : Defendant's aplicationfor'amergency refital assistarice Was approved with a:equal to or greater:than $600 reiviaining tinpald; and Defendant has not established a'rent®payment plan pursuant to.D.C:-Code: .42-3192,01 within 14 days-of the-approval with aremaining. :balance. Defendant entered into a rent payment plan with Plaintiff and is at least 5600 or twomonths behind on-the terms of the payment plan, whichever Is greater.- :Check the box that applies, and fill in any required information: As far as the plaintiff knows, the defendant does not speak a primary language other thanEnglish-or Spanish As far as the plaintiff knows, the defendant(s)' primary language Isand the Notice of Past Due Rent in this language was provided to the defendant(s). te + : : : : : : 02.22.2024Taijai Alexander, Alicia Fields3310 13th Street, SE #101Washington, DC 20032 NOTICE OF PAST DUE RENT AND INTENT TO FILE SUITThis is a notice of past due rent, The total amount of rent owed is $28,924.10 . A ledger showing the dates of rent charges and for the period of delinquency is attached. You have the right to remain in the rental unit if the total balance of unpaid rentpaymentsis paid in full or if you are current on a rent payment plan. Your landlord has the right to file a case in court seeking your eviction ifthe amount of rent you owe is equal to at least $600.00 and you do not pay the balance of unpaid rent in full within 30 days of thisnotice. If the amount you owe is lower than $600.00 your housing provider can notify you of the amount due but cannot file a casein court seeking your eviction. You have the right to defend yourself in court. Only 2 court can order your eviction. For further helpor to seek free legal services, contact the Office of the Tenant Advocate at 202-719-6560 or the Landlord Tenant Legal AssistanceNetwork at 202-780-2575. You may qualify for Emergency Rental Program Assistance (ERAP) if your household's income is equalto or less than the amounts shown below.. People in Household Maximum Income 1 $35,280 5 $55,440 2 $40,320 6 $60,480 3 $45,360 7 $65,520 4 $50,400 8 $70,560Only you or your authorized agent may apply for ERAP. To learn more about the program and apply for assistance, please visithttps://erap.dhs.de.gov. Your landlord has the right to file a case in court seeking your eviction if you do not pay the balance of rent in full within 30 days after receiving this notice, or you miss payments under a rent payment plan totaling at least $600unpaidor two months of rent, whichever is greater. If your landlord files in court, your next notice will be 2 summons to appear in court.You have the right to defend yourself in court, Only a court can order your eviction. For further help or to seek free legal services,including help applying for rental assistance or preparing a payment plan, contact the Office of Tenant Advocate at 202-719-6560or the Landlord Tenant Legal Assistance Network at 202-780-2575, AVISO DE ALQUILER VENCIDO Y LA INTENCION DE PRESENTAR UNA DEMANDAEste es un aviso de alquiler atrasado. El monto total de la renta adeudada es $28,924.10 . Se adjunta un libro de contabilidad quemuestra las fechas de los cargos y pagos de la renta para el periodo de morosidad. Tiene derecho a permanecer en Ja unidad de de alquiler. Su arrendadoralquiler si el saldo total del alquiler impago se paga en su totalidad o si esté al dia con un plan de pagotiene derecho a presentar un caso en la corte para solicitar su desalojo si la cantidad de alquiler que debe es igual a por lo menos$600.00 y usted no paga el saldo del alquiler impago en su totalidad dentro de los 30 dias posteriores a este aviso. Si la cantidad queadeuda es inferior a $600.00 y no paga el saldo del alquiler impago en su totalidad dentro de los 30 dias posteriores a este aviso. Sila cantidad que debe es inferior a $600.00, suproveedor de vivienda puede notificarle la cantidad adeudada, pero no puede presentarun caso en la corte para solicitar su desalojo, Tiene derecho a defenderse en los tribunales. Solo un tribunal puede ordenar su aldesalojo. Para obtener mas ayuda o para buscar servicios legales gratuitos, comuniquese con la Oficina del Defensor del Inquilino202-719-6560 o con la Red de Asistencia Legal para Propietarios e Inquilinos al 202-780-2575. Usted puede calificar para laAsistencia del Programa de Alquiler de Emergencia (ERAP, por sus siglas en inglés) si los ingresos de su hogar son iguales omenores que los montos que se mvestran a continuacion, Personas en el hogar Ingresos maximos 1 $35,280 5 $55,440 2 $40,320 6 $60,480 3 $45,360 7 $65,520 4 $50,400 8 $70,560Solo usted o su agente autorizado pueden solicitar ERAP. Para obtener mds informacién sobre el programa y solicitar asistencia,visite https://erap.dhs.dc.gov. Su arrendador tiene el derecho de presentar un caso en la corte buscando su desalojo si usted no pagael saldo del alquiler impago en su totalidad dentro de los 30 dias posteriores a recibir este aviso, 0 si no cumple con los pagos bajoun plan de pago de aiquiler por un total de al menos $600 o dos meses de alquiler, lo que sea mayor. Si su arrendador presenta unademanda Solo un tribunal puede ordenar su desalojo, Para obtener mas ayuda o para buscar servicios legales gratuitos, incluida la del Inquilino alayuda para solicitar asistencia de alquiler o preparar un plan de pago, comuniquese con la Oficina del Defensor202-719-6560 o con Ja Red de Asistencia Legal para Inquilinos propietarios al 202-780-2575. Raddatz: &A Sociatés,rucMark R. Raddatz, Esq. 202-466-8001Attorney for Landlord / Abogado para Propietario TENANT'S DECLARATION OF ECONOMIC OR MEDICAL HARDSHIP DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC Iam a tenant, lawful occupant, or other person responsible for paying rent, use and occupancy, or any other financial obligation under a lease or tenancy agreement at (address of dwelling unis): YOU MUST INDICATE BELOW YOUR QUALIFICATION FOR PROTECTION BY SELECTING ONE MORE OF THE OPTIONSEVICTION Tam experiencing financial or BELOW: medical hardship, and Iam unable tofinancial obligations under the lease in full or obtain pay my rent or other alternative suitable permanent housingbecause of one or more of the foll owing:o My income prior to or during the COVID-19 covered period (March 11, 2020was below 40 percent of area median through today) income, based on the chart below. o My income has decreased during the COVID-19 covered period due to factors such astemporary or permanent job loss, reduced work hours, reductions in business revenue, orreductions in financial assistance;C Personal or household expenses during the COVID-19 covered period have increased due tofactors such as COVID-19-related medical care or increased childcare costs;Cl Tam currently or during the COVID-19 covered was period eligible for cash assistance,supplemental nutrition assistance program (food stamps), supplemental security income (SSN,Medicaid or DC Healthcare Alliance, or unemployment insurance or benefits.C) Vacating my home and moving into new permanent housing would pose a significant healthrisk because myself and/or one or more members of my household have an increased risk forsevere illness or death from COVID-19 due to being over the age of sixty-five, having adisability or having an underlying medical condition, which may include but is not limited tobeing immunocompromised.To the extent that I have lost household income or had increased expenses, any additional publicassistance that I have received since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic did not make fully upfor my loss of household income or increased expenses. Tunderstand that ]I must comply with all other lawful terms under my tenancy, lease agreement or similar contract. I further understand that lawful fees, penalties or interest for not having paid rent in full or met other financial obligations as required by my tenancy, lease agreement or similar contract may still be charged or collected and may result in a monetary judgment against me. I further understand that my landlord may be able to seek eviction and that the law may provide certain protections at that time that are separate from those available through this declaration. Signed: Print Name: Date: NOTICE: You are signing and submitting this form under penalty of law. That means it is against the law to make a statement on this form that you know is false. 40%. Area Median Income Table: Maximum Income People in Household IncomePeople in Household Maximum1 $35,280 5 $55,4402 $40,320 6 $60,4803 $45,360 7 $65,5204 $50,400 $70,560 HOUSING PROVIDER'S INTEN T TO FILE A CLAIM INTENCION DEL PROVEEDOR DE TO RECOVER POSSESSION PRESENTAR UN RECLAMO PAR VIVIENDA DE A RECUPERAR LA PO SESION YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO CO RRECT OR CEASE THE ALLEGED AND REMAIN IN THE RENTAL VIOLATON OF TENANCY RENTAL UNIT UNTIL AND UN UNIT. YOU, THE TENANT, NOT HAVE TO VACATE THE LESS A COURT ORDERS ¥OU TO RIGHT TO DISPUTE THE LAN DO SO. YOU HAVE THE DLO AND REMAIN IN THE RENTAL RD'S ALLEGATIONS THROUGH THE COURT PROCESS UN MATTER. BOTH THE OFFICE OF IT UNTIL THE COURT REACHES A DECISION ON THE TH LANDLORD TENANT LEGAL ASS E TENANT ADVOCATE (202) 719-6560 AND THE MAY REFER FREE LEGAL SERVICISTANCE NETWORK. (202) 780-2575 MAY PROVIDE OR ES TO TENANTS FACING EVICTI ON. The Housing Provider hereby provides you with notice of its intent to tenant(s) d/ occupant(s) to recover file a claim against the named attached NOTICE OF PAST pos sess ion of the rent al unit sho uld the violations set forth in the DUE RENT are not correcte as call d, ed for therein.USTED TIENE DERECHO A CO RREGIR O CESAR LA PRESUNTATENENCIA Y PERMANECER EN VIOLACION DE LATIENE QUE DESALOJAR LA UN LA UN IDA D DE ALQ UILER. USTED, EL INQUILINO, NO IDAD DE ALQUILER HASTA Y A MENOLE ORDENE HACERLO. USTED TIE NE EL DERECHO DE DISPUTAR LASS QUE UN TRIBUNALPROPIETARIO A TRAVES DEL PRO ACUSACIONES DEL CESO JUDICIAL Y PERMANECER E EL TRIBUNAL TOME UNA DECISION SOBRE LA UNIDAD DEALQUILER HASTA ENLA OFICINA DEL DEQU FENSOR DEL INQUILINO EL ASUNTO. TANTOLEGAL DEL INQUILINO DEL PROPIE (202) 719-6560 COMO LA RED DE ASISTENC TARIO (202) 780-2575 PUEDEN PRO IAPUEDEN REFERIR SERVICIOS PO RCI ONAR OEL DESALOJO. LEGALES GRATUITOS A LOS INQUILINOS QUE ENFRENTANPor la presente, el Proveedor de Vivienda le proporcion un aviso dereclamo contra los a su intencién de pres inguilinos / ocupantes nombrados para entar unen caso de que se recuperar la posesién de la unidad de produzcan las violaciones establecidas en el AVIINQUILINO adjunto. no se corrigen como se SO DE ALQUILER VENCIDalqu iler O EL , pide en el mismo.OneSite Rents v3.0 The Franklin Johnston Group Management and Development, LLC Savannah - Page 48 of 77 res-370-C0202/14/2024 RESIDENT CHARGES/PAYMENTS LEDGER 03/01/2023 through 02/13/2024Parw. "lores Show transactions beginning - 03/01/2023 Select Status Current resident Ledaer Tyoe - - Resident SubdJournals - RESIDENT; Persona into Loage Info Scheduled B tllng Ledger nto Market Rent: 1,579.00 Lease Rent: 1,347.00 Previous Balance: 0.00Name: Alexander, Taijai N Move In: 03/03/2022 Other Char es: 0.00 Charges: 30.069.05 Lease Seg in: 03/03/2022 Sther Gredits: 000 Payments: 3310-101 Move Gat: ; 0212872023 Credits: 30,088.08Btdg/Unit: Current Balance: 30,069.05Status: Current resident Move-Out:Contact Info: Notice Given: Notice For: Deposits On Hand: 1,347.00 Deposits Due: 0.00 (M) (202) 361-6850email:Ledger DetatiDato Perlod Transaction Code Description Joumal Decument 4 Charge Credit Balance BidgiValt Batanca Forwardad: 0,00 3310-101 CB- LATEFEE LATEFEE RESIDENT 404,10 404.1003/24/2023 03202303/24/2023 032023. 3310-101 CA- RENT RENT RESIOENT 14,107.10 "44,511.2004/01/2023 3310-101 CA- RENT Rent RESIDENT 1,347.00 48,859.20 p4z02304/06/2023 3310-101 ca LATEFEE - Late Charges RESIDENT 67.35, 15,925.85 04202305/01/2023 3310-101 CA-RENT Real RESIDENT 1,347.00 17,272.55 052023 3310-101 CB -LATEFEE Late Charges RESIDENT 67.35 17,339.9005/06/2023 05202306/01/2023 3310-101 CA- RENT Rent RESIDENT 1,347.00 18,686.90 06202306/06/2023 3310-101 CB LATEFEE - Late Charges RESIDENT 67.35 18,754,25 06202307/01/2023 072023 3340-101 CA-RENT Rent RESIDENT 1,347.00 20,101.2507/06/2023 3310-101 CB LATEFEE - Late Charges RESIDENT 67.35 20,168.60 07202308/01/2023, 310-101 CA-RENT Rent RESIDENT 1,347.00 21,515.60 08202308/06/2023 3310-101 ¢ LATEFEE Late Charges RESIDENT 67.35 21,582.95 08202309/01/2023 3310-101 CA- RENT Rent RESIOENT 1,347.00 22,929.95 09202309/06/2023 3310-101 - LATEFEE Late Charges RESIDENT 67.35 22,997.30 092023. CB10/01/2023 3310-101 CA- RENT Rent RESIDENT 1,347.00 24,344.30 10202310/06/2023 3310-101 C8 - LATEFEE Late Charges RESIDENT 67.35 24,411.65 102023111012023 3310-101 CA- RENT Rant RESIDENT 1,347.00 25,750.65 1120231106/2023 3316-101 CB -LATEFEE tale Charges RESIDENT 67.35 25,626.00 11202312/01/2023 3310-101 CA- RENT Rent RESIDENT 1,347.00 27,173.00 42202312/06/2023 3310-101 CB- LATEFEE Late Charges RESIDENT 67.35 27,240.35 12202301/01/2024 3310-101 CA- RENT Rent RESIDENT 4,347.00 20,597.35 g42904 3310-101 CB - LATEFEE Late Charges RESIDENT 67.35 28.654,7001/06/2024 01202402/01/2024 3310-101 CA- RENT Rent RESIDENT 1,347.00 30,001.70 022024 RESIDENT 67.35 30 069.0502/06/2024 022024 3310-101 G8 LATEFEE - Late Chargos jTaijai Alexander, Alicia Fields3310 13th Street, SE #101Washington, DC 20032 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEI hereby certify that my name is Nicholle Savoy
Related Contentin District of Columbia
Case
R Street Preservation Partners v. Jasmin Bobo et al.
Apr 30, 2024 |Landlord & Tenant, Judge |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004539
Case
JAY STREET ASSOCIATES, LP v. RICHARD N EGENTI
Apr 30, 2024 |Beshouri, Joseph |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004581
Case
John Hanco*ck Life Insurance Company v. VINCENTE TILLMAN
May 01, 2024 |Landlord & Tenant, Judge |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004655
Case
Quantum Real Estate Management, LLC v. Tatiyonna Johnson
May 01, 2024 |Landlord & Tenant, Judge |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004660
Case
Atlantic Gardens Redevelopment Limited Partnership v. Johnita Rose
Apr 30, 2024 |Kravitz, Neal E |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004578
Case
Milestone East Capitol 2, LLC v. Frankie McCoy
Apr 30, 2024 |Landlord & Tenant, Judge |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004550
Case
KILEY OWNER LLC v. SHANEE HUNTER
May 01, 2024 |Bouchet, Rahkel |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004642
Case
RIL Estates, LLC v. Alan Johnson
May 02, 2024 |Landlord & Tenant, Judge |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004720
Case
Manor Village Apartments v. Chanelle Harley
May 01, 2024 |Landlord & Tenant, Judge |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004650
Ruling
SHENLY GLENN VS. BRUCE KAWABATA ET AL
Aug 02, 2024 |CGC22603262
Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for August 2, 2024 line 5. Plaintiff's Motion for Withdrawal of Attorney of Record is GRANTED. No opposition filed. Counsel to prepare an order. =(501/CFH) Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom (Video - Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; or Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252; Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849). Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required. Notice of contesting a tentative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not so notified, and the opposing party does not appear.
Ruling
SANCHEZ-CORDERO, et al. vs JOE'S PHO SAN LEANDRO INC., et al.
Jul 31, 2024 |Civil Unlimited (Wrongful Eviction Case) |22CV020109
22CV020109: SANCHEZ-CORDERO, et al. vs JOE'S PHO SAN LEANDRO INC., et al. 07/31/2024 Hearing on Motion for Leave to Amend complaint; filed by Moises Sanchez- Cordero (Plaintiff) in Department 20Tentative Ruling - 07/25/2024 Karin SchwartzThe Motion for Leave to Amend filed by Moises Sanchez-Cordero on 07/05/2024 is Granted.Plaintiffs Moises F. Sanchez-Cordero, Jose Lopez-Munoz, and Jorge Luis C. Arellano’sunopposed motion for leave to amend is GRANTED.“The court may, in furtherance of justice, and on any terms as may be proper, allow a party toamend any pleading[.]” (CCP § 473(a)(1).) A court’s discretion is usually exercised liberally topermit amendment of the pleadings, and it is a rare case in which denial of leave to amend can bejustified. (See, e.g., Howard v. County of San Diego (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1422, 1428.)Plaintiffs move for leave to amend the complaint to add a factual allegation regarding PlaintiffArellano’s period of employment and to add a cause of action for waiting time penalties.Plaintiffs state that the new allegations arise out of the same nexus of operating facts originallypleaded, and the facts were recently discovered in preparing Plaintiffs’ mediation brief. There isno opposition on file.This order shall not be construed as a determination that the First Amended Complaintadequately alleges its causes of action. PLEASE NOTE that the proposed First AmendedComplaint submitted with the moving papers is NOT deemed filed or served.Plaintiffs shall file and serve the First Amended Complaint by or before August 9, 2024.If a party does not timely contest the foregoing Tentative Ruling and appear at the hearing, theTentative Ruling will become the order of the court.HOW DO I CONTEST A TENTATIVE RULING?THROUGH ECOURTNotify the Court and all the other parties no later than 4:00 PM one court day before thescheduled hearing, and briefly identify the issues you wish to argue through the following steps:1. Log into eCourt Public Portal2. Case Search3. Enter the Case Number and select “Search”4. Select the Case Name5. Select the Tentative Rulings Tab6. Select “Click to Contest this Ruling”7. Enter your Name and Reason for Contesting8. Select “Proceed” SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 22CV020109: SANCHEZ-CORDERO, et al. vs JOE'S PHO SAN LEANDRO INC., et al. 07/31/2024 Hearing on Motion for Leave to Amend complaint; filed by Moises Sanchez- Cordero (Plaintiff) in Department 20BY EMAILSend an email to the DEPARTMENT CLERK and all the other parties no later than 4:00 PM onecourt day before the scheduled hearing. This will permit the department clerk to send invitationsto counsel to appear remotely.BOTH ECOURT AND EMAIL notices are required.
Ruling
JUAN NOLASCO, ET AL. VS L.A LIVE RENTALS, LLC, ET AL.
Aug 05, 2024 |21STCV39199
Case Number: 21STCV39199 Hearing Date: August 5, 2024 Dept: 20 Tentative Ruling Judge Kevin C. Brazile Department 20 Hearing Date: August 5, 2024 Case Name: Nolasco, et al. v. Farnad, et al. Case No.: 21STCV39199 Matter: (1) Motion to be Relieved as Counsel (2) Motion to Enforce Settlement Moving Party: (1) Jeffrey A. Asidi, counsel for Plaintiff Juan Manuel Quiroz Canchola (2) Defendant L.A. Live Rentals, LLC Responding Party: Unopposed Notice: OK Ruling: The Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is granted. The Motion to Enforce Settlement is granted. Moving parties to give notice. If counsel do not submit on the tentative, they are strongly encouraged to appear by LACourtConnect rather than in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Withdrawal of Counsel Jeffrey A. Asidi seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Juan Manuel Quiroz Canchola. The Motion is granted because it meets all requirements of Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362. Asidi to give notice. Attorney is relieved as counsel of record for client effective upon the filing of the proof of service for the Court order (form MC-053) upon the client. Enforce Settlement Defendant L.A. Live Rentals, LLC seeks to enforce its settlement with Plaintiff Juan Manuel Quiroz Canchola. Defendant contends that Canchola and the other Plaintiffs agreed to a settlement but that only Canchola refuses to sign a long-form agreement, which precludes this action from being dismissed and the insurer from tendering payment under the settlement. The Court is authorized to enter judgment pursuant to a stipulated settlement. (Code Civ. Proc. § 664.6.) In reviewing a motion to enforce a settlement, the Court determines whether the parties entered into a valid and binding settlement. (Hines v. Lukes (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1174, 1182.) A settlement is enforceable under section 664.6 only if the parties agreed to all material settlement terms. [Citations.] The court ruling on the motion may consider the parties declarations and other evidence in deciding what terms the parties agreed to, and the courts factual findings in this regard are reviewed under the substantial evidence standard. [Citations.] If the court determines that the parties entered into an enforceable settlement, it should grant the motion and enter a formal judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. (Id. at pp. 1182-1183; see also Osumi v. Sutton (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 1355, 1357 [Strong public policy in favor of the settlement of civil cases gives the trial court, which approves the settlement, the power to enforce it].) Because a valid settlement exists between the parties and the Court has retained jurisdiction (Dzharatanyan Decl., Exhibit A), the Motion to Enforce Settlement is granted. (Code Civ. Proc. § 664.6.) L.A. Live to give notice.
Ruling
U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. vs. Sells
Aug 01, 2024 |22CV-0200669
U.S. BANK TRUST, N.A. VS. SELLSCase Number: 22CV-0200669This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of proposed judgment. As previouslyordered by this Court, an Amended Proposed Judgement and Declaration have been filed clarifyingthe correct address of the subject property. The proposed judgment will be executed by the Court.No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.VALDEZ VS. FALL RIVER VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION
Ruling
Montezuma Lodge No. 172, I.O.O.F., of California, a California Public Benefit Corporation vs. Connie Jean Lewis, Trustee, Lewis Family Trust
Jul 31, 2024 |CU23-05966
CU23-05966Demurrer by Defendant CONNIE LEWIS, Trustee of the Lewis Family Trust, toComplaintTENTATIVE RULINGThe papers filed in support of this demurrer include a declaration by counsel as to meetand confer efforts preceding the filing. That declaration purported to attach as anexhibit a copy of the meet and confer letter counsel claimed to have mailed to opposingcounsel. But no letter was attached.More importantly, the request for judicial notice also claimed to be attaching copies ofthe two documents for which judicial notice was being requested. These documentswere to be a copy of a page of the Assessors Map Book, “showing the propertiesalleged to be at issue in this matter”; and a copy of a Google Map page showing certainaddresses. But again, no documents were attached.The request for judicial notice was intended to support the uncertainty basis for thisdemurrer to the entirety of the complaint, and thus the court cannot find the complaint isuncertain.The demurrer to the trespass, nuisance and negligence causes of action is alsooverruled. Page 2 of 4One of the elements of trespass is satisfied by a negligent act of the defendant causingentry onto the plaintiff’s property.The elements of trespass are: (1) the plaintiff's ownership or control of the property; (2)the defendant's intentional, reckless, or negligent entry onto the property; (3) lack ofpermission for the entry or acts in excess of permission; (4) harm; and (5) thedefendant's conduct was a substantial factor in causing the harm. (See CACI No. 2000.)Ralphs Grocery Co. v. Victory Consultants, Inc. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 245, 262.Likewise, an element of nuisance is met by negligent conduct causing interference withanother’s real property. Lussier v. San Lorenzo Valley Water Dist. (1988) 206Cal.App.3d 92, 102 [“a nuisance requires some sort of conduct, i.e. intentional andunreasonable, reckless, negligent, or ultrahazardous, that unreasonably interferes withanother's use and enjoyment of his property”].The complaint alleged that the Demurring Party “without approval by or permits from theCity of Dixon, personally directed an individual to pave the entire Parking Area byadding a layer of tar and gravel, (commonly called “blacktop”) [Complaint, ¶24]; that“The added layer did not maintain the previously existing grading but instead directssurface waters towards and onto the Oddfellow Property where it gathers and pools . . .[Complaint, ¶25], and causes damage [Complaint, ¶¶26-29].The court finds that the complaint gives the defendant “fair notice” of the nature, scopeand extent of the claims, by implying that the decision to pave the parking lot causedrainwater to be diverted from its historical path, to therefore pool in greater quantitiesnear the Oddfellow property. Edmon & Karnow (Weil & Brown), Civil Procedure BeforeTrial, §§6:128 and 6:129, p. 6-44.The court therefore overrules in its entirety the demurrer to complaint, and directs theDemurring Party to file and serve an answer within 30 days, to avoid the possibility ofdefault thereafter being entered.The parties are reminded to appear for the case management conference concurrentlyset for July 31 at 8:30 a.m., and the court will also conduct the OSC as to sanctions atthat time.PETITION OF ARTEFFECT XD, LLCCU24-04410Petition for Approval of Transfer of Structured Settlement Payment RightsTENTATIVE RULINGThe payee and counsel for the petitioning proposed transferee are to appear for hearingas scheduled. Zoom appearance is approved. Page 3 of 4
Ruling
BOBBIE REIF, ET AL. VS STEVEN A. KAUFFMAN, ET AL.
Jul 31, 2024 |20SMCV00426
Case Number: 20SMCV00426 Hearing Date: July 31, 2024 Dept: 207 TENTATIVE RULING DEPARTMENT 207 HEARING DATE July 31, 2024 CASE NUMBER 20SMCV00426 MOTION Demurrer MOVING PARTY Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as successor trustee of the Helen C. Zeff Living Trust Dated September 17, 2007 OPPOSING PARTIES Plaintiffs Bobbie Reif and Dan Herman MOTION Plaintiffs Bobbie Reif (Reif) and Dan Herman (Herman) (collectively, Plaintiffs) sued Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Successor Trustee of the Helen C. Zeff Living Trust, dated September 17, 2007 (Wells Fargo), to assert their rights to an easem*nt they purportedly retained on a parcel of land (the Zeff Property). Wells Fargo has refused to cooperate with Plaintiffs to allow Plaintiffs to construct a driveway on the easem*nt to access Plaintiffs adjacent parcel of land (Reif Property) on the basis that Plaintiffs rights to the easem*nt have been extinguished by adverse possession and merger. On May 23, 2024, Plaintiffs filed the operative First Amended Complaint (FAC), alleging five causes of action for (1) quiet title express easem*nt; (2) quiet title implied easem*nt; (3) quiet title equitable easem*nt; (4) quiet title easem*nt by necessity; and (5) declaratory relief against Defendants Wells Fargo; Steven A. Kauffman; Janice Kauffman; Lonnie Vidaurri; and Lara Vidaurri. Wells Fargo now demurs to the third and fourth causes of action on the grounds that they fail to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action and are uncertain, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 430.10, subdivisions (e) and (f), respectively. Plaintiffs oppose the demurrer and Wells Fargo replies. REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE Wells Fargo requests the Court to take Judicial Notice of Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative, summary adjudication and memorandum of points and authorities filed in this case on September 15, 2022. Judicial notice may be taken of records of any court in this state. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d)(1).) Because Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment/Adjudication is part of the Courts record for this case, the Court may take judicial notice of it. (Ibid.) However, while courts are free to take judicial notice of the existence of each document in a court file, including the truth of results reached, they may not take judicial notice of the truth of hearsay statements in decisions and court files. Courts may not take judicial notice of allegations in affidavits, declarations and probation reports in court records because such matters are reasonably subject to dispute and therefore require formal proof. (Lockley v. Law Office of Cantrell, Green, Pekich, Cruz & McCort (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 875, 882 [cleaned up].) Accordingly, the Court takes judicial notice of the existence of Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment/Adjudication filed in this matter as a court record, but not the truth of the allegations or arguments contained therein. ANALYSIS 1. DEMURRER It is black letter law that a demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the allegations in a complaint. (Lewis v. Safeway, Inc. (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 385, 388.) In testing the sufficiency of a cause of action, a court accepts [a]s true all material facts properly pled and matters which may be judicially noticed but disregard contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law. [A court also gives] the complaint a reasonable interpretation, reading it as a whole and its parts in their context. (290 Division (EAT), LLC v. City & County of San Francisco (2022) 86 Cal.App.5th 439, 450 [cleaned up]; Hacker v. Homeward Residential, Inc. (2018) 26 Cal.App.5th 270, 280 [in considering the merits of a demurrer, however, the facts alleged in the pleading are deemed to be true, however improbable they may be].) Further, in ruling on a demurrer, a court must liberally construe the allegations of the complaint with a view to substantial justice between the parties. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 452.) This rule of liberal construction means that the reviewing court draws inferences favorable to the plaintiff, not the defendant. (Perez v. Golden Empire Transit Dist. (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 1228, 1238.) In summary, [d]etermining whether the complaint is sufficient as against the demurrer on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, the rule is that if on consideration of all the facts stated it appears the plaintiff is entitled to any relief at the hands of the court against the defendants the complaint will be held good although the facts may not be clearly stated, or may be intermingled with a statement of other facts irrelevant to the cause of action shown, or although the plaintiff may demand relief to which he is not entitled under the facts alleged. (Gressley v. Williams (1961) 193 Cal.App.2d 636, 639.) A. UNCERTAINTY [D]emurrers for uncertainty are disfavored. (Lickiss v. Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 1125, 1135.) A demurrer for uncertainty will be sustained only where the pleading is so bad that the responding party cannot reasonably respond - i.e., he or she cannot reasonably determine what issues must be admitted or denied, or what claims are directed against him or her. (Khoury v. Malys of California (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 612, 616.) Where a demurrer is made upon the ground of uncertainty, the demurrer must distinctly specify exactly how or why the pleading is uncertain, and where such uncertainty appears by reference to page and line numbers. (See Fenton v. Groveland Comm. Services Dist. (1982) 135 Cal.App.3d 797, 809.) Although Wells Fargo demurs on the basis of uncertainty, Wells Fargo does not raise any substantive arguments in its briefing that the causes of action are uncertain. Ultimately, Wells Fargo does not demonstrate that any portions of the FAC are so bad that Wells Fargo cannot reasonably determine what issues must be admitted or denied, or what claims are directed against it. The Court thus declines to sustain Wells Fargos demurrer on the basis of uncertainty. B. FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION i. Third Cause of Action Equitable Easem*nt For a trial court to exercise its discretion to grant an equitable easem*nt, three factors must be present. First, the encroacher must be innocent. That is, his or her encroachment must not be willful or negligent. The court should consider the parties conduct to determine who is responsible for the dispute. Second, unless the rights of the public would be harmed, the court should stop the encroachment if the burdened landowner will suffer irreparable injury regardless of the injury to the encroacher. Third, the hardship to the encroacher from ordering removal of the encroachment must be greatly disproportionate to the hardship caused plaintiff by the continuance of the encroachment and this fact must clearly appear in the evidence and must be proved by the defendant. Unless all three prerequisites are established, a court lacks the discretion to grant an equitable easem*nt. (Hansen v. Sandridge Partners, L.P. (2018) 22 Cal.App.5th 1020, 10271028 [cleaned up].) The FAC alleges: 32. As an alternative to a judgment granting Plaintiffs rights to the Zeff Property via an easem*nt by express easem*nt or by implied easem*nt, Plaintiffs seek an (sic) judgment granting them an equitable easem*nt for the continued use of the Zeff Easem*nt for ingress and egress, roadway and incidental purposes that shall run with the land and be binding on all Defendants and their successors-in-interest. 33. Plaintiffs request that this Court balance the equities and grant Plaintiffs an equitable easem*nt on the basis that (1) Plaintiffs are informed and believe that they and their predecessors have used, or intend to use, the Zeff Easem*nt for ingress and egress, roadway and incidental purposes since at least 1967, with the belief that they had the right to use the Zeff Easem*nt; (2) Plaintiffs have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to prepare for the development of plaintiffs' property, which is currently vacant land, to build a single family residence, with the belief that they had the right to use the Zeff Easem*nt in order to build a roadway from Harbor Vista Drive to plaintiffs' property; (3) Plaintiffs have no other legal access from their property to Harbor Vista Drive that would meet the requirements needed to obtain approval from the governing entities to develop plaintiffs' property ; (4) there will be irreparable, harm to the Plaintiffs if they cannot use the Zeff Easem*nt; and (5) Defendants will suffer minimal harm from the granting to Plaintiffs of such an easem*nt over the Zeff property, as Defendants would still have the same access to the Zeff property as they have today. (FAC ¶¶ 32-33.) Thus, Plaintiffs have adequately alleged a cause of action for equitable easem*nt. Wells Fargo argues that Plaintiffs allegations are insufficient because Plaintiffs do not allege they are innocent trespassers. But Plaintiffs allege Plaintiffs are informed and believe that they and their predecessors have used, or intend to use, the Zeff Easem*nt for ingress and egress, roadway and incidental purposes since at least 1967, with the belief that they had the right to use the Zeff Easem*nt. This is sufficient at this stage of the litigation. Wells Fargo also argues that Plaintiffs fail to allege a cause of action for an equitable easem*nt because allegations that Plaintiffs have a granted easem*nt are inconsistent with allegations that they are trespassers. However, plaintiffs are permitted to plead in the alternative and make inconsistent allegations. (Klein v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 1342, 1388.) Finally, Wells Fargo argues that Plaintiffs fail to allege the second and third elements of an equitable easem*nt because, contrary to the allegation that Defendants will suffer minimal harm if the easem*nt is granted, the easem*nt will necessarily result in the removal of a portion of the Zeff house, a wrought iron fence and an old growth tree. (Opp. at p. 15.) Whether Defendants will actually suffer minimal harm is a factual question to be determined at later stages of the litigation. Therefore, the Court overrules Wells Fargos demurrer to the third cause of action. ii. Fourth Cause of Action Easem*nt By Necessity An easem*nt by necessity requires (1) a strict necessity; and (2) the dominant and servient tenements were under common ownership at the time of conveyance giving rise to the necessity. (Murphy v. Burch (2009) 46 Cal.4th 157). Strict necessity requires that the easem*nt be strictly necessary to access the dominant tenement. No easem*nt will be implied where there is another possible means of access, even if that access is shown to be inconvenient, difficult, or costly. (Id. at p. 164.) The FAC alleges: 35. Alternatively, Plaintiffs seek an Easem*nt by Necessity over the Zeff Property for access to plaintiffs' property. 36. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that there was a common ownership of plaintiffs' property and the Zeff property. 37. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that during the common ownership of the Reif Property and the Zeff Property was an existing and continuous need of the Zeff Easem*nt by the common owner for access to plaintiffs' property to permit plaintiffs' property to be developed. 38. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that the common ownership was severed by a sale and therefore the Zeff Easem*nt was intended to exist, at all times, by the parties to the sale and that the Zeff Easem*nt is strictly necessary for the use and benefit of plaintiffs' property to be able to access plaintiffs' property from Harbor Vista Drive, the nearest public roadway to plaintiffs' property. The governing entities that can approve the development of a single family residence on plaintiffs' property require an access roadway from Harbor Vista Drive to have a width of no less than 20 feet. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that they cannot develop a roadway of this required width without the use of the Zeff Easem*nt and can never access or develop their property without the use of the Zeff Easem*nt. 39. In light of the foregoing, Plaintiffs seek to quiet title against all Defendants by an Easem*nt by Necessity to the Zeff Easem*nt as of July 31, 2003, the date when REIF sold the Zeff Property to Karo Vartanian and George J. Anderson, or such other date the Court may deem reasonable and just. (FAC ¶¶ 35-39.) Wells Fargo argues that Plaintiffs fail to allege that the Zeff Easem*nt is strictly necessary to access their property, and instead, the FAC alleges the Reif Property has access to Harbor Vista Drive by virtue of the adjacent Kauffman Easem*nt. (FAC, ¶¶ 7, 10.) The Court agrees. As alleged hereinbelow, this action involves three non-exclusive driveway easem*nts located adjacent to one another which have a total width of approximately forty feet. A 12-foot wide easem*nt is located along the westerly property line of the Kauffman property, an 8-foot wide easem*nt is located along the easterly property line of the Zeff property, adjacent to the west of the 12-foot wide easem*nt on the Kauffman property, and a 20.94-foot wide easem*nt is located on the Zeff property adjacent to the west of the 8-foot wide easem*nt. The driveway easem*nts were created, inter alia, to provide vehicular access from plaintiffs' property to Harbor Vista Drive. (FAC ¶ 10, emphasis added.) Although the adjacent Kauffman and Zeff Easem*nts combined may have been strictly necessary when they were first created, Plaintiffs do not allege that the Zeff Easem*nt is still strictly necessary for Plaintiffs to access their property, and in fact, Plaintiffs allege they can currently access their property by way of the adjacent Kauffman Easem*nt. [I]mplied easem*nts are not favored by the law and must be strictly necessary to access the parcel, such that the parcel be completely landlocked without it. (Horowitz v. Noble (1978) 79 Cal.App.3d 120, 130.) Therefore, the Court sustains Wells Fargos demurrer to the fourth cause of action. 2. LEAVE TO AMEND A plaintiff has the burden of showing in what manner the complaint could be amended and how the amendment would change the legal effect of the complaint, i.e., state a cause of action. (See The Inland Oversight Committee v. City of San Bernardino (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 771, 779; PGA West Residential Assn., Inc. v. Hulven Int'l, Inc. (2017) 14 Cal.App.5th 156, 189.) A plaintiff must not only state the legal basis for the amendment, but also the factual allegations sufficient to state a cause of action or claim. (See PGA West Residential Assn., Inc. v. Hulven Int'l, Inc., supra, 14 Cal.App.5th at p. 189.) Moreover, a plaintiff does not meet his or her burden by merely stating in the opposition to a demurrer or motion to strike that if the Court finds the operative complaint deficient, plaintiff respectfully requests leave to amend. (See Major Clients Agency v Diemer (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 1116, 1133; Graham v. Bank of America (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 594, 618 [asserting an abstract right to amend does not satisfy the burden].) Here, Plaintiffs have failed to meet this burden as they do not provide any additional facts that could cure the deficiency identified above. CONCLUSION AND ORDER For the reasons stated, the Court overrules Wells Fargos Demurrer to the Third Cause of Action, and sustains without leave to amend Wells Fargos Demurrer to the Fourth Cause of Action. Further, the Court orders Wells Fargo to file and serve an Answer to the FAC on or before August 21, 2024. Wells Fargo shall provide notice of the Courts ruling and file the notice with a proof of service forthwith. DATED: July 31, 2024 ___________________________ Michael E. Whitaker Judge of the Superior Court
Ruling
PACIFIC EUROTEX CORP. VS DAVID TALASAZAN
Jul 30, 2024 |23STCV22724
Case Number: 23STCV22724 Hearing Date: July 30, 2024 Dept: 50 Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles Department 50 PACIFIC EUROTEX CORP., Plaintiff, vs. DAVID TALASAZAN, et al., Defendants. Case No.: 23STCV22724 Hearing Date: July 30, 2024 Hearing Time: 10:00 a.m. [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT Plaintiff Pacific Eurotex Corp. (Plaintiff) requests entry of default judgment against Defendant David Talasazan. Plaintiff requests judgment in the total amount of $44,528.12, comprising $42,333.08 in damages, $535.00 in costs, and $1,660.04 in attorney fees. The Court notes one defect with the submitted default judgment package. The Declaration for Default Judgment by Court in support of the request indicates that Plaintiff seeks holdover damages for the period of October 1, 2023 to December 15, 2023. Plaintiff appears to indicate that there are 76 days between these dates. (See Declaration, Item 12(c).) However, there are 75 days between October 1, 2023 and December 15, 2023. $333.33 per day multiplied by 75 days is $24,999.75. However, Plaintiff seeks $25,333.08 in holdover damages based on 76 days. The Court will discuss this issue with Plaintiff at the hearing. DATED: July 30, 2024 ________________________________ Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court
Ruling
ALYOUSIFI, et al. vs SMIDT
Aug 01, 2024 |Civil Unlimited (Other Real Property (not emin...) |23CV034319
23CV034319: ALYOUSIFI, et al. vs SMIDT 08/01/2024 Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") filed by Ahmed Alyousifi (Plaintiff) + in Department 518Tentative Ruling - 07/29/2024 Victoria KolakowskiThe Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion filed byFatima Alyousifi, Ahmed Alyousifi on 07/05/2024 is Denied.I. BackgroundPlaintiffs Ahmed and Fatima Alyousifi sued their neighbor, Rebecca Smidt, for damages andinjunctive relief, alleging that Smidt has sought to coerce and intimidate Plaintiffs to drop theircomplaints against Smidt “by spraying Plaintiff Ahmed Alyousifi with a hose, attempting toknock a phone recording their interaction from his hand, throwing bagged dog waste inPlaintiff’s driveway, threatening to record Plaintiff’s children, intimidating Plaintiffs’ childrenand trying to bring them into the dispute, shining bright lights and cameras into the house,taunting Plaintiffs and their family, and playing music that far exceeded permissible decibellevels during quiet hours.” (Compl. ¶ 46, May 24, 2023 (unnecessary capitalization removed);see also id. ¶¶ 3–42, 47.) Plaintiffs filed a complaint against Smidt asserting causes of action forviolations of the Tom Banes Civil Rights Act, trespass, and nuisance. (Id. ¶¶ 43–64.) Smidt filedan answer generally denying the allegations and asserting several affirmative defenses. (Answer,Nov. 14, 2023.)In March 2024, Ahmed Alyousifi served upon Smidt a set of admission requests. (Corbit Decl. ¶2, July 5, 2024; see also id. Ex. 1 (copy of admission requests).) Smidt did not respond. (Id. ¶ 3;see also id. Ex. 2 (granting Smidt a two-week extension to respond to the admission requests).)Plaintiffs moved to compel responses and for a $459.02 sanction. (Mot., July 5, 2024.)Smidt opposed. (Opp’n Mem., July 25, 2024.) In it, Smidt represented that the parties had agreedto hold discovery obligations while exploring settlement options and that “[t]he discoveryresponses were provide [sic] to opposing counsel in conjunction with this opposition.” (Id. 1:26–27 (unnecessary capitalization removed).)II. DiscussionThe Court finds that the motion is moot as Smidt provided further responses. Further, the Courtfinds that imposing sanctions would be unjust given the parties’ apparent agreement concerningdiscovery.III. OrdersThe motion is DENIED. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 23CV034319: ALYOUSIFI, et al. vs SMIDT 08/01/2024 Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") filed by Ahmed Alyousifi (Plaintiff) + in Department 518PLEASE NOTE: Pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1308, subdivision (a)(1), this tentativeruling will become the order of the Court unless it is contested before 4:00 PM on the court daypreceding the noticed hearing.To contest a tentative ruling, a party should do the following:First, the party must notify Department 518, by email at Dept518@alameda.courts.ca.gov andcopy all counsel of record and self-represented parties. The contesting party must state in thesubject line of the email the case name, case number and motion.Second, the party shall log into the eCourt Public Portal, search for this case (e.g., by casenumber), select the case name, select the "Tentative Rulings" tab, click the "Click to Contest thisRuling" button, enter the party's name and a brief statement of the party's reason for contestingthe tentative, and click "Proceed."Parties may appear via videoconference, using the Zoom.com website or application.TO CONNECT TO ZOOM:Department 518 is inviting you to a scheduled ZoomGov meeting.Topic: Department 518's Personal Meeting RoomJoin ZoomGov Meetinghttps://alameda-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16054307984Meeting ID: 160 5430 7984One tap mobile+16692545252,,16054307984# US (San Jose)+14154494000,,16054307984# US (US Spanish Line)---Dial by your location• +1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose)
Document
Quantum Real Estate Management, LLC v. Tatiyonna Johnson
May 01, 2024 |Landlord & Tenant, Judge |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004660
Document
Kettler Management Inc. v. Dejon Wilson
Apr 30, 2024 |Landlord & Tenant, Judge |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004591
Document
R Street Preservation Partners v. Divine Fontain
Apr 30, 2024 |Bouchet, Rahkel |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004526
Document
Milestone East Capitol 2, LLC v. Frankie McCoy
Apr 30, 2024 |Landlord & Tenant, Judge |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004550
Document
Residential One, LLC v. Rickey Owens et al.
May 01, 2024 |Landlord & Tenant, Judge |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004619
Document
Atlantic Gardens Redevelopment Limited Partnership v. Johnita Rose
Apr 30, 2024 |Kravitz, Neal E |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004578
Document
Milestone East Capitol 2, LLC v. Nathaniel Davis
Apr 30, 2024 |Landlord & Tenant, Judge |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004551
Document
Broadcast Residential Partners, LLC v. RAMON REED
Apr 30, 2024 |Beshouri, Joseph |Landlord & Tenant - Residential |2024-LTB-004597
