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.