Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 24STCV06181, Date: 2024-09-05 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCV06181 Hearing Date: September 5, 2024 Dept: 54
| 
   Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles  | 
 |||
| 
   Carlitos Dosouto,  | 
  
   Plaintiff,  | 
  
   Case
  No.:  | 
  
   24STCV06181  | 
 
| 
   vs.  | 
  
   | 
  
   Tentative Ruling  | 
 |
| 
   ADAM GREENBERG, an individual;
  BENNY STIENFIELD, an individual; C B APTS, a business entity form unknown; STEVEN
  NWORJIH, an individual, MCM PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, a California Corporation; R.
  SCOTT TUCKER & ASSOCIATES DBA RST & ASSOC, a California Corporation;
  and DOES 1-20  | 
  
   Defendants.  | 
  
   | 
  
   | 
 
| 
   | 
  
   | 
  
   | 
  
   | 
 
Hearing Date: September
5, 2024
Department 54, Judge Maurice
Leiter
Motion: Motion to
Strike
Moving Party: Defendants Carlton
Property Investments LLC (Doe 1) (erroneously Named And Served As Adam
Greenberg) and R. Scott Tucker & Associates (dba Rst & Assoc.)
Responding Party: Plaintiff Carlitos
Dosouto
            The Court considers the moving
papers, opposition, and reply. The motion is GRANTED as to the prayer for
punitive damages, and DENIED as to paragraphs 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 46, 53,
54.    
If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please
email the courtroom at¿SMCdept54@lacourt.org¿with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented
party) before 8:30 am on the day of the hearing.
BACKGROUND
 Carlitos Dosouto filed a complaint
against Adam Greenberg, Benny Stienfield, C B Apts., Steven Nworjih, MCM
Property Management, and R. Scott Tucker & Associates for four causes of
action stemming from a physical altercation. 
On April 12, 2022, Plaintiff was coming home to his apartment when
Plaintiff heard loud music coming from the apartment above. Plaintiff alleges
the apartment above was occupied by Nworjih. When Plaintiff knocked on
Nworjih’s door to request that he lower the volume of the music, Nworjih allegedly
attacked Plaintiff with a sword, severely injuring him. Plaintiff alleges (1)
battery, (2) assault, (3) premises liability, and (4) negligence.
Before the Court is a motion to strike by Defendants Carlton Property
Investments LLC and R. Scott Tucker & Associates.  
   
ANALYSIS
The court may, upon motion, or at any
time in its discretion, and upon terms it deems proper, strike any irrelevant,
false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading. (CCP § 436, subd. (a).) The
court may also strike all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in
conformity with the laws of this state, a court rule, or an order of the court.
(CCP § 436, subd. (b).) 
Motions to
strike punitive damages may be granted where the alleged facts do not support
conclusions of malice, fraud or oppression. (Turman v. Turning Point of
Central Calif., Inc. (2010) 191 Cal.App.4th 53, 63.)
            Defendants contend that either all
or a portion of paragraphs 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 46, 53, 54, and lines 13-14
and line 17 should be stricken. Plaintiff does not oppose striking the prayer
for relief for punitive damages solely as to those Defendants. 
The moving papers
fail to discuss how the other paragraphs at issue are irrelevant, false, or improper. Defendants
generally argues that the allegations are conclusory, particularly on the issue
of Defendants’ knowledge that Nworjih was dangerous, but they do not show that
the paragraphs they seek to strike are improper. Defendants concede that a
landlord may have a duty to evict a foreseeably dangerous tenant. (Madhani v. Cooper (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th
412, 415.)
  
The motion to strike is
granted as to the prayer for punitive damages, and denied as to paragraphs 17,
18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 46, 53, 54.