Judge Maurice A. Leiter, Case Number: 24STCV18189, Date: 2024-10-10 Tentative Ruling

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 8:00 am on the day of the hearing.

On July 25, 2024, Plaintiff 2464 Fletcher Drive LLC filed a complaint for unlawful detainer against Defendants Silver Lake Caregivers Group and Tolabus Stein. Plaintiff alleges Defendants failed to pay rent and operated an unlicensed cannabis dispensary on the premises.

“In moving for summary judgment, a ‘plaintiff . . . has met’ his ‘burden of showing that there is no defense to a cause of action if’ he ‘has proved each element of the cause of action entitling’ him ‘to judgment on that cause of action.’” (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 849 (as modified (July 11, 2001).) The plaintiff “must present evidence that would require a reasonable trier of fact to find any underlying material fact more likely than not—otherwise, he would not be entitled to judgment as a matter of law, but would have to present his evidence to a trier of fact.” (Id., at 851, original italics.)

Once the plaintiff has met that burden, the burden shifts to the defendant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto. (CCP § 437c(p)(1).) “There is a triable issue of material fact if, and only if, the evidence would allow a reasonable trier of fact to find the underlying fact in favor of the party opposing the motion in accordance with the applicable standard of proof.” (Aguilar, supra, 25 Cal.4th at 850.) The defendant “shall not rely upon the allegations or denials of its pleadings to show that a triable issue of material fact exists but, instead, shall set forth the specific facts showing that a triable issue of material fact exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto.” (CCP § 437c(p)(1).)

Plaintiff moves for summary adjudication of the issue of possession of the premises.[1] “The basic elements of unlawful detainer for nonpayment of rent . . . are (1) the tenant is in possession of the premises; (2) that possession is without permission; (3) the tenant is in default for nonpayment of rent; (4) the tenant has been properly served with a written three-day notice; and (5) the default continues after the three-day notice period has elapsed.” (Kruger v. Reyes (2014) 232 Cal.App.4th Supp. 10, 16.)

Plaintiff presents evidence that Plaintiff and Defendants had a commercial lease in which Defendants leased the premises from Defendants for $37,015 per month, and that Defendants have not paid rent since October 2023. Plaintiff served a notice to pay rent or quit on July 15, 2024; Defendants have not paid the back rent. This is sufficient to establish Plaintiff is entitled to possession of the premises. Defendants have not opposed this motion to show a triable issue of fact as to possession.

“Any party, within the time allowed to response to a pleading, may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part" of that pleading. (CCP § 435(b)(1).) “The Court may, upon a motion made pursuant to Section 435, or at any time in its discretion, and upon terms it deems proper: (a) Strike out any irrelevant, false or improper matter asserted in any pleading; (b) Strike out 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.)

Plaintiff moves to strike Defendant Silver Lake Caregivers Group’s answer on the ground that it is a suspended corporation. (See Timberline, Inc. v. Jaisinghani (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 1361 [stating a suspended corporation is disqualified from exercising any right, power, or privilege, including prosecuting or defending an action, or appealing a judgment.]) Defendant has not opposed to show that it has remedied the suspension.

[1] Plaintiff’s memorandum of points and authorities also requests summary adjudication of the damages owed, but the notice of motion seeks only adjudication of the issue of possession.