Judge: Thomas D. Long, Case: 23STCV24923, Date: 2024-12-26 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV24923 Hearing Date: December 26, 2024 Dept: 48
SUPERIOR
COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT
|
REGINALD RAINES, Plaintiff, vs. FORD APARTMENTS, L.P., et al., Defendants. |
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) |
[TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STRIKE Dept. 48 8:30 a.m. December 26, 2024 |
On
October 12, 2023, Plaintiff Reginald Raines filed this habitability action against
Defendants Ford Apartments L.P. and Single Room Occupancy Housing Corporation.
On
April 25, 2024, Defendants filed an answer and a motion to strike,
The
court may, upon a motion or at any time in its discretion: (1) strike out any irrelevant,
false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading; or (2) strike out all or any
part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of California,
a court rule, or an order of the court. (Code
Civ. Proc., § 436, subds. (a)-(b).)
Defendants
seek to strike portions of Paragraphs 49, 62, and 70, which relate to punitive damages,
as well as the prayer for punitive damages.
A
plaintiff can recover punitive damages in tort cases where “the defendant has been
guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice.”
(Civ. Code § 3294, subd. (a).) “The
mere allegation an intentional tort was committed is not sufficient to warrant an
award of punitive damages. [Citation.] Not only must there be circumstances of oppression,
fraud or malice, but facts must be alleged in the pleading to support such a claim. [Citation.]”
(Grieves v. Superior Court (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 159, 166, fn. omitted.)
Defendants
acknowledge that “the complaint does make specific allegations of events that Plaintiff
asserts shows a pattern of conduct which are alleged to warrant the imposition of
punitive damages.” (Motion at p. 4.) However, Defendants contend that the violations
in common areas over a three-year period “are rarely found more than once, demonstrating
that the property manager corrected the condition.” (Id. at p. 6.)
Plaintiff
alleges that he has “constantly and consistently complained to the Defendants” about
“slum-housing and untenantable conditions,” including inadequate sanitation, inadequate
plumbing and gas, dampness and mold, vermin infestation, inadequate electrical wiring,
structural hazards, nuisance, failure to maintain premises in a good and safe condition,
and inadequate mechanical equipment. (Complaint
¶ 16.) “Defendants have continually disregarded
their obligations at the Subject Property and allowed the premises to consistently
fail official housing inspections and reinspections from The City of Los Angeles
Housing Department,” resulting in citations for recurring violations. (Complaint ¶ 18.) Specifically, the Housing Department discovered
missing drywalls and ceiling in the restroom with exposed plumbing line, broken
laundry equipment, damaged ceiling vents, missing ceiling tiles, debris, and live
cockroaches. (Complaint ¶ 19.) Despite being discovered by September 2021, the
conditions were not remedied upon reinspection in December 2021, August 2022, January
2023, and June 2023. (Complaint ¶ 19.) Defendants also failed to comply with COVID safety
regulations, which the Housing Department observed from June 2020 to August 2022. (Complaint ¶ 20.)
Plaintiff
further describes “longstanding dilapidation,” including a continual flow of water
down into the building’s lower units and penetrating their walls, ceilings, and
floors; pooling of filthy water; mold and mildew from leaks; unsanitary common areas
with debris, mold, and overflowing trash; vermin and cockroach infestations; and
lack of specific safety precautions. (Complaint
¶¶ 22-26.)
These
facts, if proven, would support a finding of oppression or malice.
The
motion to strike is DENIED.
Moving
party to give notice.
Parties
who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMCDEPT48@lacourt.org
indicating intention to submit. If all parties
in the case submit on the tentative ruling, no appearances before the Court are
required unless a companion hearing (for example, a Case Management Conference)
is also on calendar.
Dated this 26th day of December 2024
|
|
|
|
|
Hon. Thomas D. Long Judge of the Superior
Court |