Turner v. 640 Main Street Partners CA2/8

Filed 7/21/14 Turner v. 640 Main Street Partners CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

VANESSA RENEE TURNER, B249240

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC497051) v.

640 MAIN STREET PARTNERS, LLC,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Rolf M. Treu, Judge. Affirmed.

Vanessa Renee Turner, in pro per., for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Zakari Law and Raymond Zakari for Defendant and Respondent.

_________________________________

We affirm an order granting a special motion to strike a first amended complaint pursuant to the Anti-Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation statute, commonly known as the Anti-SLAPP statute.1 FACTS Background Plaintiff and appellant Vanessa Renee Turner lived in a residential hotel owned by defendant and respondent 640 Main Street Partners, LCC (“Partners”) for a period of time. At some point during Turner’s tenancy, Partners filed an unlawful detainer action against Turner for nonpayment of rent. That underlying action was entitled Cecil Hotel v. Turner (Super. Ct. LA County, 2012, No. 12U02012). In April 2012, the Los Angeles County Superior Court entered a stipulated judgment in Cecil Hotel v. Turner. The stipulated judgment was signed by a hotel representative and by Turner, and approved by a superior court commissioner. The judgment included provisions awarding possession of premises located at 640 S. Main Street to the plaintiff, and stating that the plaintiff waived all back due rent, holdover damages, attorney fees, and costs of litigation. The judgment provided that Turner would give up any claim to her security deposit, “if any,” and provided for an immediate writ of possession , but “no final lockout prior to June 19, 2012.” Turner’s Complaint In December 2012, Turner, in pro. per., filed a Judicial Council standard form complaint against Partners. The complaint form included attached pages for causes of action for “general negligence” and “intentional tort.” The text of Turner’s causes of action referred to her having submitted to a credit screening, and to an unlawful detainer proceeding, and a “judgement” [sic], and to matters involving claims about unpaid rent and her having paid her rent. The complaint made references to Partners “interce[p]ting” and refusing to return tenants’ mail. Turner sought emotional distress damages and punitive damages.