Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 23CHCV02848, Date: 2024-01-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23CHCV02848    Hearing Date: January 19, 2024    Dept: F47

Dept. F47

Date: 1/19/24

Case #23CHCV02848

MOTION TO STRIKE

Motion filed on 11/28/23.

MOVING PARTY: Defendants RFT Investments, LLC; Rick Roussin and Gina Lauria dba Simi Valley Property Management*

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Derek Ballot

NOTICE: ok

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order striking portions of the complaint regarding punitive damages.

RULING: The motion is granted, as set forth below, with 20 days leave to amend. 

SUMMARY OF FACTS & PROCEDURAL HISTORY

This action arises out of Plaintiff Derek Ballot’s (Plaintiff) tenancy at the residential property located at 23142 Strathern Street, Canoga Park, California 91304.  Plaintiff alleges that the property owners and property manager retaliated against him by trying to evict him for requesting remediation of habitability issues at the property. 

On 9/25/23, Plaintiff filed this action against RFT Investments, LLC (RFT); Rick Roussin (Roussin); Gina Lauria dba Simi Valley Property Management (Lauria) and Does 1-20 for: (1) Negligence, (2) Violation of Civil Code 1942, (3) Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability, (4) Breach of Implied Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment; (5) Tenant Harassment; (6) Violation of Los Angeles Municipal Code 151.01, et seq.; (7) Violation of Business & Professions Code 17200, et seq. and (8) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.  On 11/20/23, the law firm Clausen Miller P.C. filed an answer to the complaint on behalf of Lauria.  On 11/28/23, the law firm Hanger, Steinberg, Shapiro & Ash filed the instant motion to strike portions of the complaint regarding punitive damages on behalf of RFT, Roussin and Lauria.  *Since Lauria has already answered the complaint, the Court is not considering Lauria as a moving party on this motion.  On 1/3/24, Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion to strike.

ANALYSIS

Punitive damages are recoverable in an action for breach of an obligation not arising from contract, where it is proven by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud or malice.  Civil Code 3294(a).  In this context, “‘[m]alice’ means conduct which is intended by the defendant to cause injury to the plaintiff or despicable conduct which is carried on by the defendant with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others,” “‘[o]ppression’ means despicable conduct that subjects a person to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of that person's rights,” “‘[f]raud’ means an intentional misrepresentation, deceit, or concealment of a material fact known to the defendant with the intention on the part of the defendant of thereby depriving a person of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury.”  Civil Code 3294(c).

A claim for punitive damages must be supported by specific factual allegations.  G.D. Searle & Co. (1975) 49 CA3d 22, 29, 32.

The complaint fails to allege sufficient specific facts to support a finding that defendants’ conduct was oppressive, malicious and/or fraudulent.  Additionally, the opposition concedes that Plaintiff cited the incorrect code section in support of his request for punitive damages.  (See Opposition, p.5:13-16).  As such, Plaintiff has not sufficiently plead a claim for punitive damages. 

Due to the  liberal policy of allowing leave to amend and because this is only the original complaint, Plaintiff is given the opportunity to try to cure the defects in his pleading.

CONCLUSION

The motion is granted as to Defendants RFT Investments, LLC and Rick Roussin, only.  Plaintiff is granted 20 days leave to amend.