Source: https://trellis.law/ca/issue-type/breach-of-warranty-of-habitability-444/4
Timestamp: 2020-08-04 03:09:12
Document Index: 399500309

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1941', '§17200', '§ 1942', '§ 17200', '§ 1950', '§ 1942', '§ 1941']

76-100 of 1042 results
The remaining claims are for breach of warranty of habitability, negligence, nuisance, intentional infliction of emotional distress ("IIED"), and breach of contract. Trial call was continued to June 13, 2020 and the motion/discovery cutoff date has passed. ROA # 55. On January 23, 2020, plaintiffs filed this motion for leave to add a claim for punitive damages.
Claims for breaches of the warranty of habitability can support claims for punitive damages. (See e.g., Stoiber v. Honeychuck (“Stoiber”) (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 903, 920.) Here it is alleged that Anderson repeatedly complained to Defendants regarding the bedbug infestation, and that the infestation was so severe that Anderson sought medical attention, but that Defendants intentionally failed to remedy the bedbug infestation.
Tentative ruling for March 10, 2020 on Defendant Mount Clef's Demurrer and Motion to Strike Demurrer Third cause of action for breach of warranty of habitability (CC 1942.4) The court SUSTAINS, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, the demurrer to the third cause of action. The complaint does not include allegations that a public officer inspected the subject property, or Plaintiffs' specific unit, and issued citations against Defendant.
The Court addresses each cause of action: u First Cause of Action for Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability—Civil Code §§ 1941 & 1941: This claim involves economic damages consisting of rents due and paid (Complaint, ¶ 66), personal property damages (¶ 69) and costs to repair/clean and for temporary alternative accommodations (¶ 69)—none of which would be within the scope of the arbitration clause—as well as physical and mental distress (¶¶ 67, 70), which are within the scope of the arbitration clause.
Plaintiffs filed a complaint against Defendants alleging causes of action for: (1) breach of the implied warranty of habitability; (2) negligence; (3) nuisance; and (4) violation of Los Angeles Municipal Code, Sections 151.04/151.10.
EMIL MINAS HAFTVANI VS 5045 KLUMP AVENUE APARTMENTS, LLC, ET AL.
Plaintiff filed an initial Complaint on September 25, 2019, and then filed the operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) on December 05, 2019, alleging eight causes of action sounding in (1) Negligence, (2) Breach of Warranty of Habitability, (3) Breach of the Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment, (4) Nuisance, (5) Breach of Contract, (6) Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, (7) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (“IIED”), and (8) Violation of Bus. & Prof. Code §17200 et seq.
ANALEYDA AVILA HERNANDEZ, ET AL. VS SUPER K MANAGEMENT, LLC
Discussion In this landlord-tenant habitability case, Plaintiffs allege causes of action for: 1) violation of Civil Code § 1942.4; 2) tortious breach of the warranty of habitability; 3) private nuisance; 4) Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq.; and 5) negligence. Defendant filed the instant motion to strike portions of the Complaint’s prayer for relief requesting a) attorney fees and b) exemplary and punitive damages.
BRINA WASHINGTON, ET AL. VS VANETTA N MOSBY, ET AL.
., Art Summerville Realty and Property Management, Art Summerville, City of Los Angeles, and City of Inglewood for negligence, negligent violation of statutory duty, breach of implied warranty of habitability, breach of statutory warranty of habitability, nuisance, breach of covenant of quiet enjoyment, collection of rent for untenable dwelling, constructive eviction, unlawful business practice, and breach of contract. A motion for summary judgment is set for April 2, 2020.
CHANEE HUDSON VS 4126 ASSOCIATES LP ET AL
On October 24, 2018, plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint against 4126 Associates LP and Frank Martini for breach of implied warranty of habitability, breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligence, negligence per se, premises liability, negligent misrepresentation, concealment, and unfair business practices.
Plaintiff now alleges two causes of action for: (1) breach of the implied warranty of habitability and (2) violation of Civil Code § 1950.5. Procedural History Plaintiff filed this action on August 23, 2018. The sole defendant named in the complaint is the landlord – Cynthia Peterson.
In the Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”), Plaintiffs allege seventeen causes of action based on breach of the implied warranty of habitability, negligence, and various statutory violations. On October 10, 2018, the Court sustained Defendants’ demurrer without leave to amend to the following causes of action: (10) constructive eviction, (12) abuse of process and frivolous filings, (17) breach of oral contract, and (24) fraud.
LAKE CUNNINGHAM, ET AL. VS. PETER COELER, ET AL.
Plaintiffs allege that defendants evicted plaintiffs in retaliation for contacting the housing department, in violation of Civil Code § 1942.5 and breached the implied warranty of habitability in violation of Civil Code § 1941. The file shows that on October 4, 2019, the court heard several discovery motions, including motions to deem requests for admissions admitted as to each plaintiff. The motions were deemed moot due to the service of responses before the hearing.
Defendants demur to the nuisance cause of action on the ground that Plaintiff relies on the same facts about lack of due care in alleging her breach of warranty of habitability and negligence claims as far as her nuisance claim is concerned. Defendant argues that under El Escorial Owners' Assn. v. DLC Plastering, Inc. (2007) 154 Cal.