Century City Mall v. Snowfin Franchise Group CA2/2

Filed 2/19/25 Century City Mall v. Snowfin Franchise Group CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

CENTURY CITY MALL, LLC, B332014

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 23SMCV00617) v.

SNOWFIN FRANCHISE GROUP, LLC,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Michael Small, Judge. Affirmed. Ballard Spahr, Brian D. Huben and Juliana Romeu for Plaintiff and Respondent. Park, Daniel E. Park, Alisa M. Morgenthaler, Samuel F. Izzo, Jason H. Woltman and Wil J. Rios for Defendant and Appellant.

Snowfin Franchise Group, LLC (Snowfin), appeals from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Century City Mall, LLC (Century City), in this unlawful detainer action. As the plain language of the lease agreement unambiguously required rent payment on the first of each month without a grace period, Century City’s unlawful detainer action was timely and proper. There was no error in the trial court’s order, and we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In August 2016, Century City and Snowfin entered into a commercial lease agreement for restaurant space in the Westfield Century City shopping center. The lease required Snowfin to pay rent “on or before the first day of each month, without prior demand or notice.” When rent was not paid on February 1, 2023, Century City served Snowfin with a five-day notice to pay rent or quit on February 2, 2023, demanding payment of unpaid rent. When Snowfin failed to pay or vacate, Century City filed an unlawful detainer complaint on February 9, 2023. Century City then filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing it had a right to possession because Snowfin had failed to pay the February rent on or before February 1. Snowfin opposed, claiming a triable issue of fact exists whether the lease provided a 10-day grace period to pay rent. The trial court rejected this interpretation and granted summary judgment in favor of Century City on May 9, 2023. A judgment for possession of the property in favor of Century City was entered on June 23, 2023. Snowfin filed a timely notice of appeal.