Kavalis v. Blanchard CA2/2

California Court of Appeal Jan 27, 2021 No. B299253Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the judgment against the landlord, holding that the appellant's failure to provide an adequate record on appeal precluded review of the trial court's evidentiary findings and that the challenge to the discovery sanctions was waived due to a lack of reasoned argument and legal authority.

Issues

Whether the trial court's judgment is supported by the evidence in the absence of a reporter's transcript or adequate record.
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in imposing evidentiary sanctions for discovery misuse.
Whether the appellant's challenge to the sanctions order was waived due to failure to provide cogent argument and legal authority.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The absence of a sufficient record is fatal to landlord’s appeal.”

“Where no reporter’s transcript has been provided and no error is apparent on the face of the existing appellate record, the judgment must be conclusively presumed correct as to all evidentiary matters.”

Filed 1/27/21 Kavalis v. Blanchard CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

PAULA KAVALIS, B299253

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. SC127690) v.

MICHELE BLANCHARD,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mark A. Young, Judge. Affirmed. Law Office of Motaz M. Gerges and Motaz M. Gerges, for Defendant and Appellant. Bennett Kerns for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Michele Blanchard (landlord) appeals from a judgment after a bench trial lasting less than 3 hours concerning a dispute over a residential lease. Paula Kavalis (tenant) had signed a one- year lease but vacated the property after six months. Tenant sued landlord for a return of her security deposit or an itemized statement of deductions from the security deposit. Following the bench trial, the court awarded tenant the amount of her security deposit ($11,200) plus attorney fees and interest. Landlord appeals.

BACKGROUND1 At trial, tenant presented evidence that she entered into a one-year lease with landlord; paid an $11,200 security deposit; paid six months of rent ($33,000) upfront; and vacated the premises in September 2016, six months after the lease commenced. Tenant never received her security deposit back, nor did she receive an itemized statement of deductions from the security deposit. Tenant filed suit to obtain a refund of her security deposit plus double damages pursuant to Civil Code section 1950.5. Landlord filed a cross-complaint for breach of lease and damage to the property. On January 22, 2018, tenant filed a motion to compel responses to special interrogatories and for sanctions after landlord failed to respond to tenant’s discovery request. On February 20, 2018, the trial court granted the motion and

Kavalis v. Blanchard CA2/2

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

PAULA KAVALIS, B299253

MICHELE BLANCHARD,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief