Superior Court of California 

County of Los Angeles – West District  

Beverly Hills Courthouse / Department 205 

 

 

BACKGROUND 

This action arises from a landlord-tenant dispute.  Defendant Cinetel Films Inc. (“Tenant”) entered into a sublease agreement (the “Sublease”) with Plaintiff Flynt Management Group, LLC (“Landlord”) for property located at 8484 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 850C, Beverly Hills, California (the “Property”).  (Undisputed Material Facts (“UMF”) Nos. 1-2.)  The Sublease requires Tenant to pay monthly rent in the sum of $10,771.70 for the period of time from February 2020 through January 2021.  (UMF No. 3.)   

Tenant failed to pay monthly rent in the sum of $10,711.70 which fell due on March 1, 2020.  (UMF No. 4.)  Tenant made a partial payment in the sum of $3,000 for each month from July 1, 2020 to December 1, 2020.  (UMF Nos. 5-10.)  Tenant owes Landlord the total sum of $56,981.90 for 2020.  (UMF No. 12.)   

Tenant made a partial payment of $3,000 for each month from January 1, 2021 to December 1, 2021.  (UMF Nos. 13, 15-25.)  The Sublease provides for Tenant to pay monthly rent in the sum of $11,033.05 for the period from February 2021 through January 2022.  (UMF No. 14.)   The unpaid rent owing to Landlord for the year 2021 is $96,076.25.  (UMF No. 27.)   

Tenant made a partial payment of $3,000 on account of the rent that fell due on January 1, 2022.  (UMF No. 28.)  Tenant owes Landlord the sum of $8,033.05 on account of unpaid rent for January 2022.  (UMF No. 29.)  Tenant voluntarily vacated the Property on August 12, 2022.  

The total amount of unpaid rent owed by Tenant to Landlord is in the sum of $161,090.20.  (UMF No. 30.)   

This hearing is on Landlord’s motion for summary judgment on its sole claim for breach of contract.  Tenant filed a general denial to the Complaint and asserted no affirmative defenses.  Landlord argues that there is no triable issue on each of the elements of its contract claim.  Landlord relies on requests for admissions (“RFAs”) which were deemed admitted by this Court after Tenant failed to respond to the RFAs.  No opposition was filed as of the posting of this tentative ruling.       

LEGAL STANDARD  

The function of a motion for summary judgment or adjudication is to allow a determination as to whether an opposing party cannot show evidentiary support for a pleading or claim and to enable an order of summary dismissal without the need for trial.  (Aguilar v. Atlantic Ritchfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 843.)  Code Civ. Proc. §437c(c) “requires the trial judge to grant summary judgment if all the evidence submitted and ‘all inferences reasonably deducible from the evidence’ and uncontradicted by other inferences or evidence, show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” (Adler v. Minor Healthcare Corp. (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1110, 1119.)   

“The function of the pleadings in a motion for summary judgment is to delimit the scope of the issues; the function of the affidavits or declarations is to disclose whether there is any triable issue of fact within the issues delimited by the pleadings.”  (Juge v. County of Sacramento (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th 59, 67).   

As to each claim as framed by the complaint, a plaintiff moving for summary judgment must satisfy the initial burden of proof by presenting facts to establish each essential element of the claim(s).  (Code Civ. Proc. §437c(p)(2); Scalf v. D.B. Log Homes, Inc. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1510, 1520.)  Courts “liberally construe the evidence in support of the party opposing summary judgment and resolve doubts concerning the evidence in favor of that party.”  (Dore v. Arnold Worldwide, Inc. (2006) 39 Cal.4th 384, 389.)  

Once the plaintiff has met its burden, the burden shifts to the defendant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to that cause of action or a defense thereto.  (Id.)  To establish a triable issue of material fact, the party opposing the motion must produce substantial responsive evidence.  (Sangster v. Paetkau (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 151, 166.) 

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 

Landlord requests judicial notice of (1) Revised Guidelines to Aid in the Implementation of the Los Angeles County Covid-19 Tenant Protections last revised June 10, 2022, and (2) Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles Further Amending and Restating the County of Los Angeles Covid 19 Tenant Protections Resolution dated January 25, 2022.  The Court grants the request pursuant to Cal. Evid. Code §§ 452(c) and 453.    

DISCUSSION 

The elements of a cause of action for breach of contract are (1) the existence of the contract, (2) plaintiff’s performance or excuse for nonperformance, (3) defendant’s breach, and (4) the resulting damages to the plaintiff.  (Oasis West Realty LLC v. Goldman (2011) 51 Cal.4th 811, 821.)   

Here, the parties entered into a sublease agreement.  Landlord performed on the contract by subletting the Property to Tenant.  Tenant defaulted on its obligations by failing to pay unpaid rent.  And the damages to Landlord are in the principal amount of $161,090.20.   

Landlord is also entitled to prejudgment interest.  Civ. Code § 3287 provides that “[a] person who is entitled to recover damages certain or capable of being made certain by calculation and the right to recover which is vested in the person upon a particular day, is entitled also to interest thereon from that day.”  Civ. Code § 3289 governs the amount of interest:  “If a contract entered into after January 1, 1986 does not stipulate a legal rate of interest, the obligation shall bear the interest at a rate of 10 percent per annum after a breach.”  The total amount of interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the total unpaid rent is $12,770.91.   

Additionally, Landlord is entitled to attorneys’ fees.  The Sublease provides for attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party.  (Ex. 1 at Section 11.)  The amount of such fees will be set once Plaintiff files a motion for attorneys’ fees.     

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.   

 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 

DATED:  November 16, 2023 ___________________________ 

Edward B. Moreton, Jr. 

Judge of the Superior Court