Ronald Rivera, et al. v. Total Commercial Real Estate, Inc., et al.

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE

 

MOVING PARTY: Defendants Total Commercial Real Estate, Inc. and Pandora Investments, L.P.

RESPONDING PARTY(S): Plaintiffs Ronald Rivera and Quan Duong

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

Plaintiffs Ronald Rivera and Quan Duong are tenants at a property owned, maintained, or managed by Defendants Total Commercial Real Estate and Pandora Investments, L.P. Plaintiffs allege that the property exhibited water leaks, mold, and inoperable air conditioning, among other things. 

Defendants now move to strike the request for punitive damage from the Complaint. Plaintiffs opposed.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendants’ Motion to Strike is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are given 30-days leave to amend. 

Defendants are ordered to give notice, unless waived.

DISCUSSION:

Motion to Strike

Defendants move to strike portions of the Complaint pertaining to a request for punitive damages. Defendants argue Plaintiffs’ allegations are insufficient to support an award of punitive damages. 

Civil Code § 3294 provides that “[i]n an action for the 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, the plaintiff, in addition to the actual damages, may recover damages for the sake of example and by way of punishing the defendant.” 

As defined in § 3294(c):

(1) “Malice” 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. 

(2) “Oppression” means despicable conduct that subjects a person to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of that person’s rights. 

(3) “Fraud” means that a defendant intentionally misrepresented or concealed a material fact and did so intended to harm a plaintiff.

“When the defendant is a corporation, ‘[a]n award of punitive damages against a corporation ... must rest on the malice of the corporation's employees. But the law does not impute every employee's malice to the corporation.’ [Citation.] Instead, the oppression, fraud, or malice must be perpetrated, authorized, or knowingly ratified by an officer, director, or managing agent of the corporation. (Civ.Code, § 3294, subd. (b).)” (Wilson v. S. California Edison Co. (2015) 234 Cal. App. 4th 123, 164.)

As residents of the property, Plaintiffs allege that there existed inoperable air conditioning, water intrusions, and toxic mold, among other defective conditions. (Compl. ¶ 15.) Plaintiffs further allege that Defendants acts “were done maliciously, oppressively, fraudulently, recklessly and with the intent to cause injury to or deprive Plaintiffs of their legal rights or with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs. Defendants' conduct was despicable and subjected Plaintiffs to cruel and unjust hardship.” (Id. ¶ 17.) 

Here, Plaintiffs’ allegations are insufficient to support an award of punitive damages. Plaintiffs allege only in conclusory fashion that Defendants’ actions were done “maliciously, oppressively, fraudulently, recklessly.” However, there are no facts alleged to support that position. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318 [court does not accept contentions, deductions, or conclusions of law].) In addition, Plaintiffs have not alleged conduct by any “officer, director, or managing agent of” the Defendants. (Civ.Code, § 3294, subd. (b).) This is a prerequisite to any award of punitive damages, and without it, the request must fail.

Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Strike is GRANTED. 

Generally speaking, leave to amend must be allowed where there is a reasonable possibility of successful amendment.  (Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 348.) Plaintiffs are given leave to amend to plead specific facts consistent with this ruling to support an award of punitive damages.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:   April 4, 2025 ___________________________________

Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept49@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day before the hearing.  All interested parties must be copied on the email.  It should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.