This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Contracts
Breach of Lease
Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability

Moises Coz, et al., v. 820 S. Grand View Street, Inc., et al.

Published: Dec. 6, 2019 | Result Date: Apr. 24, 2019 | Filing Date: Aug. 17, 2017 |

Case number: BC668565 Settlement –  $31,500

Judge

David Sotelo

Court

Los Angeles County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Christofer R. Chapman
(Stark, Friedman & Chapman LLP)


Defendant

Garth M. Drozin
(Law Offices of John C. Ye)


Facts

Between 2006 and November 20, 2016, 10 plaintiffs, comprising of six adults and four minors, resided at unit 201 of the Grand Pointe apartments, in Los Angeles. Three persons who did not actually reside at that apartment signed the lease, and plaintiff Demetrio Lopez, signed the lease during various years. As many as 10 persons lived in apartment 201, a two-bedroom apartment with one bath. Plaintiffs filed a claim against the owner and manager of the building, alleging defendants breached the implied warranty of habitability.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs contended there were repairs needed, that were not promptly or ever effectuated after notice to the landlord, resulting in general damages and specials, including healthcare bills and costs of throwing away old and buying new furniture and clothing, because of insect infestations. Plaintiffs alleged that the owner and manager were negligent for having failed to properly remediate known problems, including failure of systems, plumbing, doors, carpets, and ceilings, and that insect infestations were common throughout the subject 10 years.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants contended that 8 of the 10 plaintiffs residing in unit 201 were unauthorized, and so could not avail themselves of Civil Code Section 1941, et seq.

Defendants contended that the unit was in good condition prior to the plaintiffs' move-in, and that the unit was in poor condition when plaintiffs left. There were 28 invoices covering 2015 through 2016, for repairs to the facility that were not in distress before move-in, suggesting plaintiffs damaged the apartment.

Defendants further contended that defendants attempted fumigations numerous times, but plaintiffs had not prepared their apartment per the preparation sheet dispensed to plaintiffs, or that defendants were not allowed to fumigate, and that repairs were timely made, even when caused by misuse or abuse of the property by plaintiffs in violation of the lease.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiffs made a $250,000 joint, statutory demand. Defendants made a $2,740 statutory offer.

Damages

Plaintiffs claimed an estimated $50,000 in combined personal goods loss, loss of earnings, and healthcare bills.

Injuries

Bedbug bites and emotional distress.

Result

All 10 plaintiffs settled with defendants for $3,150 each.


#132554

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390