Judge: Michael Shultz, Case: 24CMCV00412, Date: 2024-07-02 Tentative Ruling
INSTRUCTIONS: If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance on the matter, the moving party must:
1. Contact the opposing party and all other parties who have appeared in the action and confirm that each will submit on the tentative ruling.
2. No later than 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing, call the Courtroom (310-761-4302) advising that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling and waive hearing; and
3. Serve notice of the Court's ruling on all parties entitled to receive service.
If this procedure is followed, when the case is called the Court will enter its ruling on the motion in accordance with its tentative ruling. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary, and all parties should appear at the hearing. If there is neither a telephone call nor an appearance, then the matter may either be taken off calendar or ruled on.
TENTATIVE RULINGS -- http://www.lacourt.org/tentativeRulingNet/u
Case Number: 24CMCV00412 Hearing Date: July 2, 2024 Dept: A
24CMCV00412
Veronica Childs v. Erica Ortiz, et al.
[TENTATIVE] ORDER
I.
BACKGROUND
This is an
unlawful detainer action arising from Defendants’ alleged failure to pay rent required
by the parties’ written agreement and after Plaintiff served Defendants with a
three-day notice to pay rent or quit (“Notice”).
Defendants, Erica
Ortiz and Mario Acosta (“Defendants”), demur to the complaint on grounds
Plaintiff failed to attach proof that Plaintiff properly served the Notice. The
Notice itself is defective as it does not provide a valid method for curing the
breach.
Defendants timely
served the demurrer on April 4, 2024, by mail. Plaintiff did not file an
opposition.
II.
DISCUSSION
The complaint is
defective as it fails to include the written lease agreement, nor has Plaintiff
explained why the written agreement is not attached. (Code
Civ. Proc., § 1166 subd. (d)(1)(B).) Additionally, Plaintiff is required to
attach the notice or notices of termination served on the tenants upon which
the complaint is based. (Code
Civ. Proc., § 1166 (subd. (d)(1)(A).)
Contrary to
Defendants’ argument, Plaintiff is not required to attach proof of service of
the of the Notice(s). (Code
Civ. Proc., § 1166 (a)(5).) Plaintiff may also allege the manner in which
the three-day notice to pay rent or quit notice was served. (Id.)
Here, Plaintiff alleges that the required notice was personally delivered on
Defendants. (Complaint,
¶ 10.)
III.
CONCLUSION
As the complaint
is defective, the Court SUSTAINS Defendants’ demurrer for failure to state a
cause of action. Plaintiff is given five days leave to amend the complaint to
cure the foregoing defects.