Judge Elaine W. Mandel, Case Number: 23SMCV02642, Date: 2024-05-28 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Elaine W. Mandel, Case: 23SMCV02642, Date: 2024-05-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMCV02642 Hearing Date: May 28, 2024 Dept: P

Tentative Ruling

Michel Nedjathaeim v. HOA Premier Management LLC, et al., Case No. 23SMCV02642

Hearing date May 28, 2024

Defendants HOA Premier Management, LLC, Durant Towers Owner’s Association, Inc., Benjamin Hyles, and Carrie Field’s Motion to Strike

Plaintiff Nedjathaeim sued defendants HOA Premier Management, LLC, Durant Towers Owner’s Association, Hyles and Field, regarding failures to repair plaintiff’s condominium. Defendants move to strike the prayer for punitive damages and requests for attorneys’ fees. Code Civ. Proc. §§ 435-437.

Punitive Damages: A motion to strike is the procedure to attack unjustified punitive damages. (Venice Town Council, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1996) 47 Cal.App.4th 1547, 1561-1562.) A complaint including a request for punitive damages must also include allegations showing that the plaintiff is entitled to such an award. (Clauson v. Superior Court, supra, 67 Cal.App.4th at p. 1255.) A claim for punitive damages cannot be pleaded generally and allegations that a defendant acted "with oppression, fraud and malice" toward plaintiff are insufficient legal conclusions to show that the plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages. (Brousseau v. Jarrett (1977) 73 Cal.App.3d 864, 872.) Specific factual allegations are required to support a claim for punitive damages. (Ibid.)

Plaintiff’s complaint details a dispute over defendants’ alleged failure to repair. Plaintiff alleges he first listed the property for sale in June 2021 (Compl., ¶ 10). Within several weeks, the HOA informed him a plumbing leak originating in a common area damaged the property, limiting its resale value (Id., ¶¶ 11-13). More substandard conditions were discovered over ensuing months (Id., ¶¶ 18-31). The complaint alleges the HOA consistently failed to cooperate as necessary to allow plaintiff to perform repairs (Id.). Eventually he gave up and sold his property as-is, allegedly resulting in lost profits (Id., ¶ 31). Plaintiff alleges defendants’ promises to repair were intentionally false, but only by legal conclusion, no supporting facts (Id., ¶¶45-46, 145, 148, 166-167).

The consistent, long-term refusal of the HOA to cooperate with plaintiff’s reasonable efforts to repair his property could be construed as a conscious disregard of his rights as a condominium owner and HOA members. However, plaintiff fails to allege any specific facts, only alleging legal conclusions unsupported by a factual basis.

There is a single allegation at paragraph 34 that Hyles – a named defendant and employee of the HOA – “threatened to prevent Plaintiff from selling the Subject Property. On information and belief, Mr. Hyles made this threat without the HOA Board’s consent.” (Id., ¶ 34, emphasis added.) This allegation is not specific enough to support a claim for punitives as is.

There are no allegations of oppression, fraud, or malice sufficient to state a claim for punitive damages. Motion to strike is GRANTED with leave to amend to allege facts establishing malice, fraud and/or oppression, as is required to impose punitive damages.

Attorney Fees: Per Civil Code section 1717, “[i]n any action on a contract, where the contract specifically provides that attorney's fees and costs, which are incurred to enforce that contract, shall be awarded either to one of the parties or to the prevailing party, then the party who is determined to be the party prevailing on the contract, whether he or she is the party specified in the contract or not, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees in addition to other costs.” (Civ. Code § 1717, subd. (a); see also Silver Creek, LLC v. BlackRock Realty Advisors, Inc. (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 1533, 1538.)

The parties’ Superseding and Restated Declaration Establishing a Plan of Condominium Ownership, section 18.02 reads: “In any proceeding arising because of any alleged breach or default under this Declaration, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover the costs of the proceeding and such reasonable attorneys’ fees and may be determined by the court.” See Nedjathaeim Decl., Exh. A, p. 61. Attorney’s fees are contractually allowable. Motion DENIED.