SHAILA and JUNAID’s Motion to Strike Punitive Damages
Case No. CU25-07357
SHAILA and JUNAID’s Motion to Strike Punitive Damages
Defendants SHAILA HOLDINGS LLC and NADER JUNAID (“Moving Defendants”) move to strike the allegations and prayer within Plaintiff MARQUIEL YOUNG’s first amended complaint (“1AC”) concerning punitive damages. Summarized, Plaintiff alleges that she rented a residence from Defendants (including Defendant VIRGINIA HILLS LLC) that was not habitable due to cockroaches, mold, a dirty air system, cracking paint, and more. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants retaliated against her in violation of Civil Code section 1942.5 by moving to evict her because she complained about the uninhabitable premises.
Code of Civil Procedure section 436, subdivision (a) permits a court to strike out any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading. A motion to strike must be filed within the time provided to respond to a pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (b)(1).) A court has discretion to grant any motion to strike made outside that time frame, though. (Code Civ. Proc., § 436.) Irrelevant matters are those not essential to the statement of a claim or defense or not pertinent to or supported by an otherwise sufficient claim or defense and demands for relief not supported by the allegations. (Code Civ.
Proc., § 431.10.) “The grounds for a motion to strike shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice;” therefore, a motion to strike may not be based upon extrinsic evidence such as a declaration. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437, subd. (a).)
Civil Code section 3294, subdivision (a) provides that punitive damages are only available in actions not arising from breach of contract if is “proven by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice.” This means that a plaintiff’s pleading asking for punitive damages must plead facts to support a finding of oppression, fraud, or malice. (Grieves v. Superior Court (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 159, 166
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?”
Code, § 3294, subd. (c).) “Despicable” conduct refers to that which is “base, vile, or contemptible” and is something more than simple willful and conscious disregard for others. (College Hospital Inc. v. Superior Court (1994) 8 Cal.4th 704, 725.)
Plaintiff alleges at page 4, lines 4 to 16, of the 1AC that Defendants’ agent harassed and intimidated her by filming her at her apartment despite being asked to leave and attempting to enter her children’s bedroom without permission. She also alleges that Defendants’ agent taunted her when she said she would call the police, saying “no one was going to help.” Most significantly, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants retaliated against her for complaining about habitability by evicting her. The first amended complaint contains valid factual allegations demonstrating malicious and/or oppressive conduct potentially supporting imposition of punitive damages.
Moving Defendants’ motion to strike the punitive damages allegations and prayer is denied.
BEASLEY, et al. v. SELENE FINANCE LP, et al.