Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 24STCV02729, Date: 2024-08-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV02729    Hearing Date: August 12, 2024    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendants’ motion to strike is GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART. Defendants’ motion to strike is DENIED as to the prayer for punitive damages, but GRANTED as to the attorney fees request.

            On 2/1/2024, Plaintiff Daniel Molina (Plaintiff) filed suit against Enrich Estate, LLC and Jiayu Zheng (collectively, Defendants), alleging: (1) damage to real property; (2) trespass; (3) negligence (4) negligence per se; (5) negligent hiring, supervision, or retention, and (6) intrusion into private affairs. 

            Now, Defendants move to strike portions of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

Discussion

            Defendants move to strike Plaintiff’s prayer for punitive damages and request for attorney fees.

            As for punitive damages, Plaintiff has an operative claim for intrusion into private affairs. Plaintiffs alleges that “Defendants began to engage in harassing behavior, including but not limited to installing video cameras on the outside of the Adjacent Property pointed directly at the Subject Property. Moreover, Defendants have sent unknown individuals to Plaintiff’s home without warning, who purport to be contractors hired by Defendants to repair and replace the damaged fence. It is unknown whether these “contractors” were licensed or were in fact contractors at all.”  (Complaint ¶ 29.) As such, accepted as true at the pleading stage, Plaintiff has alleged facts which could show that Defendants engaged in conduct intended to cause injury and with “willful and conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others.” (CCP § 3294, subd. (c)(1).)

            As for attorney fees, in the absence of such statute and contract, “California follows what is commonly referred to as the American rule, which provides that each party to a lawsuit must ordinarily pay his own attorney fees.” (See CCP § 1021; also Trope v. Katz (1995)11 Cal. 4th 274, 278-279). Here, Plaintiff has not alleged any contractual or statutory basis to recover attorney fees. In opposition, Plaintiff argues that she is entitled to recover under CCP section 1021.9. However, section 1021.9 only applies to agricultural land: “In any action to recover damages to personal or real property resulting from trespassing on lands either under cultivation or intended or used for the raising of livestock, the prevailing plaintiff shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees in addition to other costs, and in addition to any liability for damages imposed by law.” Here, Plaintiff alleges damages to a residential property, not land under cultivation or intended to raise livestock.

            Based on the foregoing, Defendants’ motion to strike is granted in part, denied in part. Defendants’ motion to strike is denied as to the prayer for punitive damages, but granted as to the attorney fees request.

It is so ordered.

Dated:  August    , 2024

   Hon. Jon R. Takasugi
   Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.  If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar.  For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.