Judge: Shirley K. Watkins, Case: 23VECV00616, Date: 2023-05-23 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23VECV00616 Hearing Date: May 23, 2023 Dept: T
23VECV00616 PRIME WELLINGTON VILLAS, LL... vs JORDAN BUTLER
[TENTATIVE] ORDER: Defendants Jordan Butler, Sawdah Ahmed-Butler, and Rashaan Butler’s Demurrer to the Complaint is OVERRULED. Answer is due within 5 days.
Defendants Jordan Butler, Sawdah Ahmed-Butler, and Rashaan Butler (collectively, Defendants) demurred to Plaintiff Prime Wellington Villas, LLC’s (Plaintiff) Complaint for Unlawful Detainer.
Discussion
Defendants argued that the Three-Day Notice to Pay or Quit (Notice) was not properly served because they did not receive the Notice. However, Plaintiff expressly alleged in the Complaint that the Notice was served upon Defendant Butler. (Compl. pars. 9 and 10.) For demurrer purposes, the factual allegations in the Complaint are deemed true. Defendants’ dispute against the alleged service is not proper for a demurrer. The Demurrer based upon the alleged defective service is not persuasive.
Defendants argued that the Notice lacked a specific time and day for payment. In support of this contention, Defendants cited to Code of Civil Procedure section 1161(2). However, the statute does not require a “specific time and day” for payment. As cited by Defendants, the statute only required “the usual days and hours that person will be available to receive the payment.” The Notice attached to the Complaint complied with the statutory requirement by expressly stating: “Payments made in person may be delivered between the hours of: M-Sun: 8:30am-5:30pm After hours: Rent drop box.” (Compl. Exh. 2.) Defendants’ argument is not supported by the Complaint’s attached exhibit.
Defendants argued that they never received a copy of the alleged Rental Agreement. (Code Civ. Proc. sec. 1962.) The Court notes that Code of Civil Procedure section 1962 does not exist. Even if Plaintiff was required to provide a copy of the Rental Agreement to Defendant, the requirement is not seen as a pleading element for an unlawful detainer action. Defendants failed to present any legal authority to show that providing a copy of the Rental Agreement at the time the premise was rented is a pleading requirement for unlawful detainer actions. The argument is not persuasive.
The Demurrer to the Complaint is OVERRULED.
IT IS SO ORDERED, CLERK TO GIVE NOTICE.