Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 22STCP01915, Date: 2022-12-21 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCP01915 Hearing Date: December 21, 2022 Dept: 26
Twin Oaks Mobile Home
Park, LP v. Mora, et al.
PERMANENT
INJUNCTION
(Civil
Code § 798.88)
TENTATIVE RULING:
Petitioner Twin
Oak Mobile Home Park LP’s Petition for
Permanent Injunction is CONTINUED TO JANUARY 18, 2022 AT 8:30 AM IN DEPARTMENT
26 IN THE SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. BY JANUARY 4, 2022, PETITIONER IS TO FILE
PROOF OF SERVICE OF THE NOTICE OF CONTINUED HEARING DATE ON RESPONDENT. FAILURE
TO DO SO MAY RESULT IN THE PETITION BEING DENIED.
ANALYSIS:
Petitioner Twin
Oaks Mobile Home Park, LP (“Petitioner”) filed the instant Petition for
Permanent Injunction Pursuant to Civil Code section 798.88 against Belen Mora (“Respondent”) on May 19,
2022. Proof of personal service of the Petition was filed on July 27, 2022. The
Petition initially came for hearing on September 22, 2022 at which time the
matter was continued to November 17, 2022 to allow Petitioner to demonstrate
proper notice. (Minute Order, 09/22/22.) Petitioner filed a Notice of
Continuance on September 22, 2022 and proof of service of the same on September
30, 2022. On November 10, 2022, however, the Court continued the hearing again
with instruction to Petitioner to give Respondent notice of the continuance.
(Minute Order, 11/10/22.) Petitioner filed a Notice of Continuance on December 16,
2022.
No response to the Petition has been filed to
date.
Discussion
Petitioner moves
pursuant to Civil Code section 786.88 for an order enjoining Respondent from
continuing violations of the rules of Petitioner’s Mobile Home Park, Twin Oaks
Mobile Home Park (“the Park”), located at 3800 Bradford Street, La Verne,
California. (Pet., ¶2.) Respondent’s Mobilehome is located on Space 53 of the
Park. (Id. at ¶4.) Respondent’s violations include inappropriate,
threatening, and disturbing conduct towards Park staff, management, and other
residents. (Id. at ¶7.) This conduct violates the parties’ Rental
Agreement at paragraphs 16 and 49, and Park Rules at paragraphs 4(E), 12(A),
12(D), and 12(F). (Id. at p. 4:12-14.)
Petitioner
requests an injunction against Respondent from further violations and
reasonable attorney fees and costs. (Id. at p. 4:11-26.)
Legal Standard
The Mobilehome Residency Law (“MRL”) gives management an
injunctive relief remedy for violations of reasonable park rules and regulations.
(Civ. Code, § 798.88.) Specifically, management may obtain a restraining order
against a continuing or recurring violation of any “reasonable rule or
regulation.” (Civ. Code, § 798.88, subd. (b); Rancho Santa Paula Mobilehome
Park, Ltd. v. Evans (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 1139, 1142.) At the time of the
hearing, the court shall issue the injunction if it finds by clear and
convincing evidence the existence of a continuing or recurring violation of a
“reasonable rule or regulation.” (Civ. Code, § 798.88, subd. (d).) The duration
of the injunction may not exceed three years. (Civ. Code, § 798.88, subd. (d).)
Discussion
Although the moving statute does not provide for a specific
notice period, Respondent is entitled to reasonable notice prior to issuance of
an order on the Petition. (See Menefee & Son v. Dent. of Food
&Agriculture (1988) 199 Cal.App.3d 774, 781.) Failure to give notice is
a violation of due process. (Jones v. Otero (1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 754,
757.) Petitioner filed a proof of personal service on July 27, 2022
demonstrating that the Petition was served on Respondent on June 6, 2022.
(Proof of Personal Service, filed 07/27/22.) However, no proof of service had
been filed demonstrating that Respondent was served with the Notice of Hearing.
For that reason, the Court continued the hearing and ordered Petitioner to give
notice of the hearing and file proof of service of the same by November 1,
2022. (Minute Order, 09/22/22.) When the hearing was continued by the Court
from November 17, 2022 to December 21, 2022, the Court again instructed
Petitioner to give notice. (Minute Order, 11/10/22.) Petitioner served the
Notice of Hearing on Respondent on December 16, 2022 by mail and overnight
delivery. (Notice of Continuance, filed 12/16/22.) For service by mail, this is
the equivalent of providing notice on the hearing date itself; for service by
overnight delivery, this is like providing notice on December 20, 2022, which
is just one day before the hearing. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 1013, subd. (a).)
It remains, therefore, that Petitioner has not provided Respondent with
reasonable notice of the hearing date.
Substantively, the Petition is verified and supported by
exhibits documenting the parties’ contractual relationship and Respondent’s
violations of the Park rules. Specifically, the exhibits demonstrate that
Respondent has resided on the Premises
since March 25, 2010, pursuant to a written Rental Agreement. (Pet., ¶4 and
Exh. A.) The Rental Agreement incorporates the Park’s Rules and Regulations,
and any amendments thereto, thereby requiring the residents to abide by the
same. (Pet., Exh. A at ¶¶16 and 49.) Respondent has been in violation of the
Park Rules at paragraphs 4(E), 12(A), 12(D), and 12(F) since November
2021 and thereafter. (Pet., ¶¶7, 10, 13
and Exhs. C, E, G.)
These violations included inappropriate, threatening, and
disturbing conduct towards Park staff, management, and other residents. (Ibid.)
Petitioner issued three seven-day notices to comply with Park Rules to
Respondents on November 11, 2021, January 19, 2022, and February 15, 2022. (Ibid.)
All the violations remain ongoing as of the filing of this Petition. (Pet.,
¶¶9, 12, 15-17.) The Petition, therefore, provides clear and convincing evidence
of Respondent’s violations of the Park’s reasonable Rules and Regulations. Nor
has Respondent filed any response to the Petition.
However, it remains that Petitioner has not demonstrated reasonable
Notice of Hearing on Respondent. The hearing will be continued one last time to
allow Petitioner to provide the necessary notice.
Conclusion
Petitioner Twin
Oak Mobile Home Park LP’s Petition for
Permanent Injunction is CONTINUED TO JANUARY 18, 2022 AT 8:30 AM IN DEPARTMENT
26 IN THE SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. BY JANUARY 4, 2022, PETITIONER IS TO FILE
PROOF OF SERVICE OF THE NOTICE OF CONTINUED HEARING DATE ON RESPONDENT. FAILURE
TO DO SO MAY RESULT IN THE PETITION BEING DENIED.
Moving party to give
notice.