Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 2CMUD01004, Date: 2024-04-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 2CMUD01004    Hearing Date: April 10, 2024    Dept: 14

Barry Saywitz Properties Two, LP v. Medina, et al

Case Background

 

This is an unlawful detainer case with a companion wrongful eviction case. The tenants claim that they lost their jobs during the Covid-19 pandemic and applied for rental assistance from the state of California, which they got. In January of 2022, the landlord filed an unlawful detainer proceeding (not the instant proceeding).

 

In the related case, the tenants allege that when they asked the landlord’s agent why the previous unlawful detainer had been filed, the agent told them that the landlord had sought a bank loan for renovations and the bank had demanded proof that the landlord was actually trying to collect rent. According to the tenants, the landlord’s agent told them not to worry, the filing was a formality and would not actually be pursued.

 

The previous unlawful detainer was pursued. Judgment was entered by default. The tenants applied to have the judgment set aside. While their application was pending, they were evicted. The court later set aside the judgment as void.

 

This action has been filed by the landlord for the sole purpose of recovering unpaid rent.

 

            On August 17, 2022, Plaintiffs filed their form Complaint in Unlawful Detainer against Defendants Delilah Medina (“Medina”), Theodore Bailey (“Bailey”), and DOES 1-10.

 

            On October 12, 2022, Defendants Medina and Bailey filed their joint form Answer.

 

            No trial date is currently set.

           

Instant Hearing

 

            On February 27, 2023, counsel told this court that they had reached a settlement agreement. The court then set an OSC re: Dismissal for March 27, 2023. That OSC was later continued to April 3, 2023.

 

            On April 3, 2023, the court continued the OSC re: Dismissal to June 30, 2023.

 

            On June 12, 2023, the court issued a minute order stating that it had received an Unlawful Detainer Stipulation and Judgment. The minute order also stated that the court rejected the filing because the address of the property as listed in the judgment did not match the address of the property as listed in the complaint.

 

            The OSC re: Dismissal was continued again to November 17, 2023. At that point, this court converted the hearing into an OSC re: Submission of Stipulated Judgment, and set it for January 11, 2024. The court subsequently continued the hearing to January 23, 2024. On that date, the hearing was continued to the instant date.

 

            On February 5, 2024, Plaintiff submitted an Unlawful Detainer Stipulation and Judgment. This was Plaintiff’s only attempt to resubmit since the filing was rejected eight months before.

 

            The submitted judgment provides that no money will be paid, but that Defendants will vacate the premises by June 23, 2023. It also provides that enforcement will be stayed until June 22, 2022. Finally, it contains an interlineation which appears to have been done (albeit merely to correct a typographical error) after the stipulation was executed.

 

            Because Plaintiff has waited so long to submit this Stipulation and Judgment, it cannot be entered by the clerk. The court cannot render a judgment requiring that something occur in the past, or that enforcement be stayed until some time in the past. Nor can the court enter a stipulation which appears to have been altered after signature, no matter how innocent the alteration.

 

            At this point, what Plaintiff has is not a stipulated judgment. It is an executed contract with a Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6 provision. If there are terms that Defendants have yet to perform, Plaintiff’s remedy is a motion to enforce the settlement. If Defendants have fully performed, then Plaintiff ought to dismiss the case.

 

            Therefore, the clerk is directed to reject the document submitted on February 5, 2024. This OSC is DISCHARGED. The court sets an OSC re: Dismissal for May 8, 2024 at 8:30 am.