Defendant Stephanie Urdahl’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
July 10, 2026 Law and Motion Calendar
HONORABLE MICHAEL L. MAU, Department 20 ________________________________________________________________________
09:00 AM 26-UDL-00442 CP VIII WESTLAKE OWNER 1 LLC v. PAUAL CHRISTENSEN LINE 9
CP VIII WESTLAKE OWNER 1 LLC KIYOSHI DIN PAULA CHRISTENSEN JULIET BRODIE
DEFENDANT STEPHANIE URDAHL’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
TENTATIVE RULING:
Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED.
This is a residential unlawful detainer action based on a three-day notice to quit. Def Stephanie Urdahl moves for judgment on the pleadings.
A motion for judgment on the pleadings may be granted when the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. CCP §438(3). An unlawful detainer complaint fails to state a cause of action if it does not allege fact to show that def’s right to possession was properly terminated. Borsuk v. Appellate Division of Superior Court (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 607, 611. Foster v. Williams (2014) 229 Cal.App.4th Supp. 9, 14.
In this case, the three-day notice to quit states that defendant was arrested for misdemeanor battery and public intoxication after entering another unit and then slapping and pushing two contractors renovating the unit. There is no dispute that plaintiff seeks to evict defendant based on this single incident.
CCP Section 1161(4) provides that a tenant permitting, committing, maintaining or permitting the maintenance or commission of a nuisance, thereby terminates the lease and the landlord shall be entitled to possession under the unlawful detainer procedure. Civil Code §3479 defines a nuisance as anything that is injurious to health or is indecent or offensive to the senses or an obstruction to the free use of property so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property. Defendant cites no California authority that interprets Code of Civil Procedure section 1161, subdivision (4) to require continuing conduct. Section 1161, subdivision (4), also expressly refers to actions that may be in the singular, but the words “committing” or “commission of a nuisance.” Id. Thus, the code itself does not even require continuing conduct.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Defendant’s additional assertion that the single incident alleged in the complaint is insufficient to constitute a nuisance under Civil Code section 3479 presents a question of fact that must be determined by the trier of fact. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. Superior Court (1996) 13 Cal.4th 893, 937-938.
As such, the motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED.