Nahrstedt Court of Appeal.doc
of 15
Transcript of Nahrstedt Court of Appeal.doc
-
7/29/2019 Nahrstedt Court of Appeal.doc
1/15
Review Granted
Previously published at: 9 Cal.App.4th 1 15 Cal.App.4th 315 20 Cal.App.4th 539 25 Cal.App.4th 1473
(Cal.Const. art. 6, s 12; Cal. Rules of Court, Rules 28, 976, 977, 979)
View California Official Reports version
Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 3, California.Natore A. NAHRSTEDT, Plaintiff and Appellant,
v.LAKESIDE VILLAGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOC., INC., et al., Defendants and Respondents.No. B053259.Aug. 28, 1992.
Review Granted Nov. 19, 1992.
Condominium unit owner brought action against board of directors of condominium association challenging petrestrictions and seeking to recover damages for invasion of privacy and emotional distress. Condominiumassociation counterclaimed for enforcement of fines which it had imposed. The Superior Court, Los AngelesCounty, No. WEC144478, Lawrence Waddington, J., sustained demurrer to plaintiffs claims, and plaintiff appealed.The Court of Appeal, Croskey, J., held that: (1) appeal would be treated as petition for writ of mandate with respectto one defendant whose cross claim remained; (2) complaint stated cause of action for declaratory relief with respectto reasonableness of the prohibition and for damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress; (3) complaint didnot state cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress; and (4) complaint stated cause of action for
injunctive relief.Judgment reversed and writ of mandate issued.Hinz, J., dissented and filed an opinion.*300Joel F. Tamraz, Santa Monica, for plaintiff and appellant.Wilner, Klein & Siegel, Leonard Siegel,Laura J. Snokeand Thomas M. Ware, II, Beverly Hills, for defendants andrespondents.
CROSKEY, Associate Justice.This action concerns (1) a plaintiff who wishes to continue living with her three pet cats in the condominium sheowns, (2) a provision in the recorded covenants, conditions and restrictions ("CC & R's") governing thatcondominium, which prohibits owners of the units in her condominium project *301 from keeping most types ofpets, and (3) the authority of the board of directors of her homeowners association to levy monetary fines on
homeowners who violate that pet restriction. Plaintiff has filed this action to obtain, among other things, adeclaration that she (1) is entitled to keep her pets in her condominium, notwithstanding the CC & R's [FN1] and (2)has no legal obligation to pay the fines which have been assessed against her for her refusal to move her cats out ofher condominium. This case comes to us on an appeal from a judgment of dismissal which was entered after the trialcourt sustained, without leave to amend, demurrers to all six causes of action in plaintiff's original complaint.
FN1.The CC & R's, as well as certain rules adopted by the board of directors of the homeownersassociation, were made exhibits to plaintiff's complaint and are part of the record on appeal.
Defendants contend that plaintiff's appeal violates the "one final judgment rule" because there is an outstandingcross-complaint filed by one of the defendants, Lakeside Village Homeowners Association ("Homeowners
Association"). As we find the appeal is proper as to all the other defendants, we treat the appeal as to theHomeowners Association as a petition for a writ of mandamus. The interests of judicial economy will be served byour resolution of these pleading issues so that there can be a single trial on both the complaint and the cross-complaint.
We conclude that plaintiff has stated at least three causes of action and should have been given leave to amend hercomplaint in order to state additional causes of action if she can. Therefore, the judgment of dismissal will bereversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND[FN2]
http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=CA-ORCS&SerialNum=1992152308&FindType=Y&USID=E6DDB56D6EF6474D8555813E69F599A8&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0300327501&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0300327501&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0300327501&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0158650601&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0158650601&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0122739001&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0122739001&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0122739001&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0191080201&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0155882601&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=CA-ORCS&SerialNum=1992152308&FindType=Y&USID=E6DDB56D6EF6474D8555813E69F599A8&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0300327501&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0158650601&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0122739001&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0191080201&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD-PEOPLECITE&DocName=0155882601&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_top -
7/29/2019 Nahrstedt Court of Appeal.doc
2/15
FN2.Because the genesis of this appeal was defendants' general demurrer to plaintiff's complaint, the factsupon which the appeal turns will be those set out in that complaint. As we discuss below, our review of thejudgment appealed from will assume the truth of the factual allegations asserted by plaintiff in hercomplaint.
1. The PartiesPlaintiff resides in the Lakeside Village Condominiums in Culver City. She filed her complaint on February 20,1990 and named as defendants the Lakeside Village Condominium Association ("Condominium Association"), theHomeowners Association, and certain persons alleged in the complaint to be employees, agents, officers anddirectors of the Homeowners Association and the Condominium Association.
2. The ComplaintWe describe here, in turn, the essential allegations of each of the six causes of action in the complaint. Causes ofaction two through six each reallege all of the prior charging allegations.
a.Plaintiff's first cause of action is for invasion of privacy. In it she alleges that Article VII, section 11 of the CC &R's for the condominium project provides in part: "No animals (which shall mean dogs and cats), livestock, reptilesor poultry shall be kept in any unit except that usual and ordinary domestic fish and birds (and [sic] inside bird
cages) may be kept as household pets within any unit; provided (a) they are not kept, bred or raised for commercialpurposes or in unreasonable numbers; and (b) prior written approval of the Board [of Directors of the CondominiumAssociation] is first obtained. As used herein, 'unreasonable numbers' shall be determined by the Board, but in noevent shall such term be construed so as to permit the maintenance by any owner of more than two (2) pets per unit.The Association shall have the right to prohibit maintenance of any pet which constitutes, in the opinion of theBoard, a nuisance to any other owner."
Plaintiff alleges that her three cats at all times remain inside her unit and are noiseless and not a nuisance; thatbeginning in July 1988 defendants peered into and entered her condominium without a compelling reason to do soand in violation of the California Constitution's provision for privacy, found in Article 1, section 1 thereof; thatdefendants have harassed plaintiff by *302 assessing penalties against her in increasingly large amounts, (beginningwith $25/month and increasing in steps to $500/month), to penalize her for keeping her pet cats; and that theassessments are in violation of the CC & R's and in violation of her right to privacy.
b.Plaintiff's second cause of action is for declaratory relief. She alleges that the "cat provision" in the CC & R's isoverly broad and, as applied to her, violates her constitutional right to privacy; that the requisite state action ispresent because of the small claims court actions brought against her for the fines levied on her; that the catprovision is "unreasonable" underCivil Code section 1354;[FN3] that the defendants believe the cat provision isconstitutional and enforceable; and that an actual controversy exists between herself and defendants regarding saidprovision.
FN3.At the time this action was filed,Civil Code section 1354stated: "The covenants and restrictions inthe declaration [of CC & R's] shall be enforceable equitable servitudes, unless unreasonable, and shallinure to the benefit of and bind all owners of separate interests in the project. Unless the declaration statesotherwise, these servitudes may be enforced by any owner of a separate interest or by the association, or byboth." (Emphasis added.) An amendment to section 1354, effective July 1, 1991, provides that "In any
action to enforce the declaration, the prevailing party shall be awarded reasonable attorney's fees andcosts."
Section 1354is found in title 6 of part 4 of division 2 of the Civil
Code. Title 6 is entitled "Common Interest Developments." A common interest development is any of thefollowing: community apartment project, condominium project, planned development and stockcooperative. (Civ.Code, 1351.)
http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1351&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1351&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_top -
7/29/2019 Nahrstedt Court of Appeal.doc
3/15
c.Plaintiff's third and fourth causes of action are for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress,respectively. In the former, she alleges that defendants have assessed fines against her as a penalty for keeping hercats; that the cats are not a nuisance, are clean, are kept inside her unit and have not been the object of complaints byany of her close neighbors; that defendants' acts in assessing her fines which are unauthorized, have been designedto inflict emotional distress upon her and have done so; that as a result, plaintiff has had to seek medical attention;that the fines have been designed to force her to sell her condominium at an unreasonable price or remove her catsfrom her home; and that defendants' acts are intentional and malicious.
d.In the cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress, plaintiff alleges that defendants knew orshould have known that she is excitable emotionally, that she is susceptible to being easily upset, and that she issusceptible of obsessing about defendants' unfair and unprovoked actions. Plaintiff further alleges that she is entitledto live in her home undisturbed and unharassed; that defendants' acts were negligent; that as a proximate result ofsaid negligence, she suffered "profound shock to her nervous system, resulting in physical injuries, for which shehas sought the help of physicians [and] psychologists"; and that she has incurred expenses associated therewith.
e.Plaintiff's fifth cause of action is labeled one "to invalidate penal assessments levied in excess of authority and fordamages."In this cause of action, plaintiff alleges that although the CC & R's do provide for certain charges andassessments (i.e., regular monthly assessments, special assessments for capital improvements, and emergency
assessments), no other assessments are provided for in the CC & R's. This cause of action also alleges that the catassessments levied against plaintiff and against a "substantial portion" of the other condominium owners who alsopossess pets, are defendants' attempt "to reduce the regular maintenance assessments and capital expendituresassessments ... and offset other expenses...." Plaintiff further alleges that defendants' acts are a conversion of hermoney, are actions without authorization and are not acts on behalf of the Homeowners Association or theCondominium Association.
f.Plaintiff's sixth and last cause of action is for injunctive relief. In it, she alleges that the defendants threaten toimpose a lien on her home as a means of *303 enforcing their pet assessments (which she estimates to be $6,000 peryear) and she further alleges that the assessments and threatened lien could cause her to lose her home. She requeststhat the court enjoin defendants from making and enforcing the assessments.
3. The Cross-Complaint
Defendant Homeowners Association filed a cross-complaint against plaintiff alleging causes of action for nuisanceand declaratory relief. [FN4] According to the cause of action for nuisance, article V, section 2(a) of the CC & R'sgives "the Board"[FN5] authority to adopt rules and regulations necessary to enforce the CC & R's and the boardhas adopted rules that authorize the issuance of fines to enforce the board's rule against pets. Additionally, the cross-complaint alleges that article XV, section 2 of the CC & R's provides that any violation of the CC & R's constitutes anuisance and shall be subjected to the remedies allowed at law or in equity against a nuisance. HomeownersAssociation seeks an injunction against plaintiff's maintenance of the cats in her home.
FN4.The cross-complaint labels the cross-complainant as the Lakeside Village Homeowners Association;however, the cross-complaint also describes the cross-complainant as the Lakeside Village CondominiumAssociation.
FN5.Apparently, the cross-complainant means the board of directors of the condominium association.
In its cause of action for declaratory relief, Homeowners Association alleges: "An actual controversy has arisen andnow exists between the [Homeowners] Association and [plaintiff] as to the validity of the pet restriction in the CC &R's and her right to violate the pet restriction and refuse to pay fines assessed against her for such violation. []Cross- complainant desires a judicial determination of the respective rights and duties of the [Homeowners]
-
7/29/2019 Nahrstedt Court of Appeal.doc
4/15
Association and [plaintiff] with respect to enforcement of the aforesaid CC & R provisions. [Homeowners]Association desires a judicial determination that the pet restriction is reasonable and enforceable, that fines assessedfor its violation are reasonable and enforceable, and that [plaintiff] is to be ordered to remove the pets from her unitand pay the assessed fines. [] Such a declaration is necessary and appropriate at this time in order that the[Homeowners] Association may ascertain its rights and duties with respect to the CC & R's. Determination of theseissues at this time is necessary and appropriate in order to avoid the uncertainty and multiplicity of actions thatwould result if such a declaratory judgment was not rendered at this time."
Defendants generally demurred to all six causes of action in plaintiff's complaint, including her cause of action fordeclaratory relief. Plaintiff filed opposition to the demurrer. The trial court found that each of the six causes ofaction failed to state a valid cause of action and the court signed an "Order of Dismissal of Complaint" as well as a"Judgment of Dismissal of Plaintiff's Complaint."[FN6] Plaintiff has filed this timely appeal from the judgment.
FN6.In her opening brief, plaintiff states she requested but was denied leave to amend her complaint.
DISCUSSION1. The Issue of Appealability[1] Defendants challenge the appealability of the judgment of dismissal, contending it is not appealable because the
cross-complaint remains to be tried. With respect to all but one of the named defendants, we disagree. Of the elevennamed defendants, only one (the Homeowners Association) has cross-complained against plaintiff. Thus, thejudgment of dismissal constitutes a final judgment against plaintiff and in favor of the other ten defendants sincethey face no further proceedings in the trial court vis-a-vis plaintiff. As to these defendants, the judgment isappealable. (California Dental Assn. v. California Dental Hygienists' Assn. (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 49, 58-60, 271Cal.Rptr. 410.)
[2] However, like the California Dentalcourt, we find that there are compelling *304 reasons to review thejudgment of dismissal as to allof the defendants, including the cross-complainant, Homeowners Association. It isclear that the facts giving rise to the complaint against all the defendants are the same ones that underlie the cross-complaint. If we were to exclude the Homeowners Association from our review of the judgment of dismissal, thiscase would be in the procedural posture of (1) receiving, in this appeal, a review of those common facts, as theyrelate to ten of the eleven defendants; (2) proceeding to trial on the cross-complaint to achieve a final judgment on
it; and then (3) having plaintiff appeal that subsequent final judgment wherein she would raise against HomeownersAssociation the same issue she is now raising against the other ten defendants in the instant appeal, i.e., whether thedemurrers to all causes of action in the original complaint should have been sustained and sustained without leave toamend.
In the interest of judicial economy and to avoid inconsistent judgments, we choose to treat plaintiff's appeal, as itrelates to the cross-complainant, as a petition for a writ of mandate and address its merits while we address themerits of the appeal as to the other ten defendants.(California Dental Assn. v. California Dental Hygienists' Assn.,
supra, 222 Cal.App.3d at p. 60, 271 Cal.Rptr. 410.)
2. Standard of Review[3] A general demurrer admits all material and issuable facts that are properly pleaded in the complaint, but not thecontentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law alleged therein. (Daar v. Yellow Cab. Co. (1967) 67 Cal.2d
695, 713, 63 Cal.Rptr. 724, 433 P.2d 732.)Thus, such properly pleaded allegations of fact are accepted as true forpurposes of ruling on the demurrer and the court must assume that the plaintiff will be able to prove all of the factsas alleged. (Fundin v. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co. (1984) 152 Cal.App.3d 951, 955, 199 Cal.Rptr. 789.)When reviewing the merits of a general demurrer, "The court must, at every stage of an action, disregard any defectin the pleadings that does not affect the substantial rights of the parties. Pleadings must be reasonably interpreted;they must be read as a whole and each part must be given the meaning that it derives from the context wherein itappears. All that is necessary as against a general demurrer is to plead facts showing that the plaintiff may beentitled to some relief. In passing upon the sufficiency of a pleading, its allegations must be liberally construed witha view to substantial justice between the parties."(Fundin v. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co., supra, 152 Cal.App.3d at
http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1967128894&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1967128894&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1967128894&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1967128894&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1967128894&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1990109612&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1967128894&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1967128894&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_top -
7/29/2019 Nahrstedt Court of Appeal.doc
5/15
p. 955, 199 Cal.Rptr. 789.)
In determining whether a general demurrer should be sustained, "the rule is, that if upon a consideration of all thefacts stated it appears that the plaintiff is entitled to any relief at the hands of the court against the defendants, thecomplaint will be held good, although the facts may not be clearly stated, or may be intermingled with a statementof other facts irrelevant to the cause of action shown, or although the plaintiff may demand relief to which he is notentitled under the facts alleged." (
Matteson v. Wagoner(1905) 147 Cal. 739, 742, 82 P. 436.)
[4] If the trial court finds that a general demurrer should be sustained, it must then determine whether to grant theplaintiff leave to amend. "If, despite defects in form or substance, it is reasonably probable that the complaint can becured by amendment, and if a fair, earlier opportunity to correct the substantive defect has not been given, ademurrer should not be sustained without leave to amend. [Citation.]" (Fundin v. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co.,
supra, 152 Cal.App.3d at pp. 955-956, 199 Cal.Rptr. 789.) Thus, when general demurrers are sustained withoutleave to amend, the reviewing court determines if there is a reasonable possibility that the defects in the complaint(if indeed there are any), can be cured by an amendment. If such a possibility of cure exists, then the trial court hasabused its discretion in denying leave to amend and the order of dismissal is reversed. *305(Blank v. Kirwan (1985)39 Cal.3d 311, 318, 216 Cal.Rptr. 718, 703 P.2d 58.) It is the plaintiff's burden to show either the trial court or thereviewing court how the complaint can be amended to state a cause of action. (Code Civ.Proc., 472c;Goodman v.
Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349, 134 Cal.Rptr. 375, 556 P.2d 737.)
3. The Cause of Action for Declaratory Relief[FN7]
FN7.While generally demurring to plaintiff's cause of action for declaratory relief, defendant HomeownersAssociation filed a cross- complaint with its own cause of action for declaratory relief based on thesame
facts as involved in plaintiff's complaint. We are puzzled by this tactic. The only reason we can think of forHomeowner Association's actions is that it desires to limit and control the presentation of evidence at trialby doing away with plaintiff's competing cause of action for such relief. If that in fact was the purpose ofsuch pleading, we have little sympathy for such gamesmanship.
a. IntroductionCode of Civil Procedure section 1060 provides for causes of action for declaratory relief.Section 1060 states in
pertinent part: "Any person interested under a ... written instrument ... may, in cases of actual controversy relating tothe legal rights and duties of the respective parties, bring an original action ... or file a cross-complaint in a pendingaction ... for a declaration of his rights and duties in the premises, including a determination of any question ofconstruction or validity arising under such instrument...." Declaratory relief may be asked for alone or together withclaims for other relief. (Columbia Pictures Corp. v. DeToth (1945) 26 Cal.2d 753, 761, 161 P.2d 217.) To obtaindeclaratory relief, the plaintiff need notallege facts that establish his right to a declaration that isfavorable to him.(Id. at p. 760, 161 P.2d 217.).
"A [cause of action] for declaratory relief is legally sufficient if it sets forth facts showing the existence of an actualcontroversy relating to the legal rights and duties of the respective parties under a written instrument and requeststhat these rights and duties be adjudged by the court. [Citations.]" (Maguire v. Hibernia S. & L. Soc. (1944) 23Cal.2d 719, 728, 146 P.2d 673.) Obviously, if the cause of action for declaratory relief is legally sufficient, it is notsusceptible to a general demurrer. Such is the case here; plaintiff's cause of action for declaratory relief is legally
sufficient and therefore the demurrer should have been overruled.
"Where ... a case is properly before the trial court, under a complaint which is legally sufficient and sets forth factsand circumstances showing that a declaratory adjudication is entirely appropriate, the trial court may not properlyrefuse to assume jurisdiction; and if it does enter a dismissal, it will be directed by an appellate tribunal to entertainthe action. Declaratory relief must be granted when the facts justifying that course are sufficiently alleged."(Columbia Pictures Corp. v. DeToth, supra, 26 Cal.2d at p. 762, 161 P.2d 217.)
We are aware of the rule that "Leave to amend [a cause of action for declaratory relief] is properly denied if the factsand nature of plaintiff's claim are clear and under substantive law, no liability exists [citation]."(Haskins v. San
http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=660&SerialNum=1905005352&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=660&SerialNum=1905005352&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=660&SerialNum=1905005352&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1985139336&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1985139336&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1985139336&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1985139336&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1985139336&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACPS472C&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1976134475&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1976134475&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1976134475&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1976134475&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1976134475&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACPS1060&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACPS1060&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACPS1060&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1944112691&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1944112691&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1944112691&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1944112691&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1980100169&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1980100169&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1980100169&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1980100169&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=660&SerialNum=1905005352&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1984112148&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1985139336&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1985139336&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACPS472C&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1976134475&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1976134475&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACPS1060&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACPS1060&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1944112691&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1944112691&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1980100169&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_top -
7/29/2019 Nahrstedt Court of Appeal.doc
6/15
Diego County Dept. of Public Welfare (1980) 100 Cal.App.3d 961, 965, 161 Cal.Rptr. 385.) Defendants argue thatthis rule should be applied here because published cases have stated that pet restrictions in CC & R's areenforceable. We disagree with defendants' contention for two reasons.
First, this "leave to amend" rule is not applicable here because plaintiff's cause of action for declaratory reliefdoesstate a cause of action for such relief; therefore, she has no need to amend that cause of action. Second, of the five"pet restriction" cases cited by defendants, four are from other jurisdictions and are not binding on us. [FN8] Thesole California case *306 (Ritchey v. Villa Nueva Condominium Assn. (1978) 81 Cal.App.3d 688, 697, 146 Cal.Rptr.695)did not squarely address pet restrictions. Rather, it dealt with a restriction against persons under 18 years ofage. Its comment regarding the "reasonableness" of pet restrictions was pure dicta, not supported by reasoning ordiscussion.
FN8.We feel compelled to address another aspect of defendants' citation to these four out-of-state cases. Intheir citation to three of them, defendants misspelled the case names. In their citation to two of those threecases, defendants severely mangled the reporter citation, causing this court a lengthy search for the cases.To say the least, such conduct on the part of defendants' attorneys was less than helpful.
Of the four out-of-state cases cited by defendants, one focused on a lessee's defense that the landlord was selectively
enforcing a "no dogs" term in a lease. It did not analyze the merits of such a restriction.(1036 Park Corp. v. Rubin(N.Y.Supreme Ct., App.Div.1983) 92 A.D.2d 452, 458 N.Y.S.2d 595.) Another of the opinions did not address petrestrictions at all but did address the issue of attorney's fees, and merely noted that "In a prior summary proceedingthe defendant [lessee] was found to have willfully violated a house rule restricting the harboring of pets on thepremises." (930 Fifth Corporation v. King(N.Y.Ct. of Appeals 1977) 42 N.Y.2d 886, 397 N.Y.S.2d 788, 366N.E.2d 875.) A review of the published opinion for that "prior proceeding" shows the court merely stated: "We havestated that 'a landlord can legally enforce a lease providing for the prohibition of dogs as a matter of law' (Hillman
Housing Corp. v. Krupnik[40 A.D.2d 788] ... 337 N.Y.S.2d 547)." (930 Fifth Corporation v. King(N.Y.SupremeCt., App.Div.1972) 42 N.Y.2d 886, 397 N.Y.S.2d 788, 366 N.E.2d 875.) Tracing theHillman Housingcase backshowed that the New York courts have found landlords' pet restrictions to be "reasonable and enforceable."
Whatever the merits of the two New York cases cited by defendants, neither they, nor their progeny or predecessors,are helpful to this court. First, rather than involving condominium projects where each occupant is an "owner" of a
particular unit and a fraction of the common area, they involved pet restrictions in apartment housing and suchhousing involves a lease or rental relationship. Second, neither had to consider a statutory requirement that anyrestriction imposed by condominium CC & R's be reasonable, as we must consider in this case. (Civ.Code, 1354.)
The other two out-of-state cases cited by defendants do address pet restrictions placed on condominium owners. InWilshire Condominium Ass'n., Inc. v. Kohlbrand(Fla.Ct. of Appeal 1979) 368 So.2d 629, the court examined acondominium regulation which permitted purchasers of condominium units to keep the dogs that they owned whenthey moved into the unit but forbade them from replacing such pets when the pets died or otherwise left the unit.The court adopted a "reasonableness" test in examining the challenged restriction. The court found that therestriction was "reasonably consistent with principles that promote the health, happiness and peace of mind of unitowners living in close proximity." The court did not explain why the replacement dogs would impinge on the health,happiness and peace of mind of unit owners but the dogs originally owned by buyers would not.
InDulaney Towers Maintenance v. O'Brey (Md.Ct. of Special Appeals 1980) 418 A.2d 1233, the court considered arestriction that permitted unit owners to keep one dog or one cat. The defendants kept two dogs in their unit andwere sued. The court found the restriction reasonable. It noted that courts have often upheld restrictions regulatingdogs and stated that communal living requires giving fair consideration to the rights and privileges of all occupantsof the condominium project so as to provide a harmonious atmosphere.
NeitherWilshire CondominiumnorDulaney Towers is helpful to the resolution of the case before us because (1)neither case addressed the reasonableness of a blanket restriction against keeping any cats in a condominium unit,(2) neither addressed a statutory limitation on condominium restrictions similar to the one inCivil Code section1354, and (3)neither examined the particular facts of the case before it to see if the challenged restrictions were
http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1980100169&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1980100169&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1980100169&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1978101992&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1978101992&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1978101992&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1978101992&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1978101992&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1978101992&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1983106638&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1983106638&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1983106638&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1983106638&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1983106638&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1972121732&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1972121732&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1972121732&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1972121732&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1972121732&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1972121732&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1972121732&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=735&SerialNum=1979107729&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=735&SerialNum=1979107729&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=735&SerialNum=1979107729&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=162&SerialNum=1980136763&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=162&SerialNum=1980136763&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=162&SerialNum=1980136763&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1979107729&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1979107729&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1979107729&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1980136763&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1980100169&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1978101992&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1978101992&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1983106638&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1983106638&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1972121732&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=602&SerialNum=1972121732&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=578&SerialNum=1977128378&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1972121732&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=735&SerialNum=1979107729&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=162&SerialNum=1980136763&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1979107729&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1980136763&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_top -
7/29/2019 Nahrstedt Court of Appeal.doc
7/15
reasonable as applied to those facts. This latter characteristic runs contrary to the approach taken by our Californiacourts in examining challenged provisions in condominium and "planned community" CC & R's to see if they areenforceable under *307 Civil Code section 1354. For example, inBernardo Villas Management Corp. v. Black(1987) 190 Cal.App.3d 153, 235 Cal.Rptr. 509 andPortola Hills Community Assn. v. James (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th289, 5 Cal.Rptr.2d 580, the courts found that the CC & R restrictions sought to be enforced by homeownermanagement groups were unreasonable when they were applied to the circumstances of the homeowners who werechallenging them.
InBernardo Villas,the provisions being challenged precluded residents from parking trucks in the project except ona temporary basis for the purpose of loading or unloading the trucks. The provisions also restricted the project'scarports to passenger automobiles and non-powered vehicles, such as bicycles. The defendants in the case parkedtheir new pickup truck, which they used solely for their personal transportation, in their carport space. Themanagement of the project sued to enjoin them from doing so and to recover $2,060 in fines it had imposed on thedefendants for violating the truck restriction. In its opinion, the court appliedCivil Code section 1354. It stated: "thetrial court properly found the restriction unreasonable as applied to clean noncommercial pickup trucks. The courtcorrectly concluded the parking of such vehicles in condominium carports was not aesthetically unpleasant toreasonable persons and did not interfere with other owners' use and enjoyment of their property." (Bernardo Villas
Management Corp. v. Black, supra, 190 Cal.App.3d at pp. 154-155, 235 Cal.Rptr. 509.)
Also instructive isPortola Hills Community Assn. v. James, supra, 4 Cal.App.4th 289, 5 Cal.Rptr.2d 580. There, the
challenged CC & R provision was a total ban on satellite dishes in the "planned community" of Portola Hills. Theplaintiff was the body having the right to enforce the CC & R's. The defendant installed a satellite dish in his backyard. The trial court found from the evidence that the dish was installed in such a manner that it was not visible toother residents of the community or to the public and therefore the defendant did not have to remove the dish. Onreview, thePortola Hillscourt agreed with the trial court's conclusion. Its opinion begins: "Is a private restrictionprohibiting a homeowner from installing a satellite dish in his yard unreasonable? In this case it is." (Id. at p. 291, 5Cal.Rptr.2d 580.) Thereafter in its opinion, the court stated: "With [the finding of nonvisibility] established, thequestion becomes whether the ban against a satellite dish that cannot be seen promotes any legitimate goal of theassociation. It clearly does not. Accordingly, the restriction is unreasonable as a matter of law." (Id. at p. 293, 5Cal.Rptr.2d 580.)
b. The Standard to be Applied by the Trial Court[5] The question of whether the pet restriction at issue in the case before us is an enforceable equitable servitudeunderCivil Code section 1354is a mixed issue of law and fact which can only be resolved in the context of the
particular circumstances of this case. (Portola Hills Community Assn. v. James, supra, 4 Cal.App.4th at p. 293, 5Cal.Rptr.2d 580;Bernardo Villas Management Corp. v. Black, supra, 190 Cal.App.3d at p. 154, 235 Cal.Rptr. 509.)InPortola HillsandBernardo Villas,the courts did not address the question of law (i.e., the reasonableness of therestrictions being challenged), until the question of fact (the circumstances of the particular homeowners who werechallenging the restrictions) was determined.
[6] So also here, the enforceability of the pet restriction will be decided in the trial court after the taking of evidenceas to the relevant circumstances of this case. Restrictions in CC & R's regarding the ownership and possession ofpets are reasonable and therefore are enforceable underCivil Code section 1354when they prohibit conduct which,while otherwise lawful, in fact interferes with, or has a reasonable likelihood of interfering with, the rights of othercondominium owners to the peaceful and quiet enjoyment of their property.
[7] Defendants argue that the blanket pet restriction they seek to enforce against plaintiff is reasonable and
enforceable because it avoids a situation where they must *308 always take a "wait and see" position on pets andthen litigate over pets that are causing problems in the condominium project. We reject this contention. First, it runscontrary to the philosophy ofPortola HillsandBernardo Villas,which is to judge situations on their own specificfacts. Plaintiff's condominium home is her castle and her enjoyment of it should be by the least restrictive meanspossible, conducive with a harmonious communal living arrangement. Second, if carried to its logical conclusion,defendants' argument could be used to support all-inclusive bans on such diverse things as stereo equipment, socialgatherings and visitors between the ages of two and eighteen. We cannot envision the courts finding that blanketrestrictions against such things are reasonable; yet it is certainly conceivable that allowing Fluffin, Muffin andRuffin to live inside plaintiff's condominium will pose less of a threat to the peace and quiet of the parties'communal living arrangement than would stereo equipment, parties or young visitors.
http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=3484&SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1992055988&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1987039800&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_top -
7/29/2019 Nahrstedt Court of Appeal.doc
8/15
c. The Issue of Estoppel[8][9] As a final observation on the issue ofCivil Code section 1354 "reasonableness," we note its effect ondefendants' contention that by purchasing a unit in the condominium project, plaintiff agreed to and became boundby the pet restriction and should not now be heard to complain of it. The contention is without merit because undersection 1354, defendants can only enforce restrictions in CC & R's that are reasonable. Thus, if the pet restriction atissue here is found to be unreasonable as applied to plaintiff because plaintiff's conduct in keeping her cats has notinterfered with and does not have a reasonable likelihood of interfering with, the rights of other owners to thepeaceful and quiet enjoyment of their property, then by the very terms ofsection 1354, it is not enforceable againstplaintiff, even though she brought her unit with at least constructive knowledge that keeping cats in the project wasforbidden. [FN9]
FN9.Plaintiff alleged in her complaint that she was not provided with a copy of the CC & R's prior to theclose of her escrow and was not otherwise aware of the pet restriction. Defendants assert, and we agree,that whether or not plaintiff had actualknowledge of the pet restriction when she purchased her unit isirrelevant to the question of whether it can be enforced against her. Defendants correctly point out thatrecordation of the CC & R's gave her constructive notice of it. (Seaton v. Clifford(1972) 24 Cal.App.3d 46,50, 100 Cal.Rptr. 779.)Thus, her allegations regarding lack of actual knowledge are of no assistance to her.
4. The Cause of Action for Invasion of Privacy[10] Although some of the allegations in plaintiff's cause of action for invasion of privacy are more properly placedin her cause of action for declaratory relief and others are more properly included in a cause of action for trespass,the cause of action for invasion of privacy does indeed survive a general demurrer because it does state a cause ofaction. "When a complaint is good as against a general demurrer, it is erroneous for the trial court to sustain thedemurrer without leave to amend because of defects in the form of pleading. This is not to hold that the complaint isnot subject to special demurrer. Upon the remanding of the cause the trial court may in its discretion require theclarification of uncertainties or ambiguities in the pleading. [Citations.]"(Columbia Pictures Corp. v. DeToth,
supra, 26 Cal.2d at p. 762, 161 P.2d 217.)
Plaintiff should have been given an opportunity to revise the invasion of privacy cause of action by limiting it to theallegations regarding defendants' peering into and entering her home. She should also have been given theopportunity to advance these allegations as a basis for a cause of action for trespass. [FN10] The other allegations
pertaining to the pet restriction should be included in plaintiff's cause of action for declaratory relief, as a basis forher assertion that such a restriction is unreasonable *309 and therefore unenforceable underCivil Code section1354.
FN10.Contrary to defendant's assertion, these allegations are not a conclusionary deduction; they areallegations of fact. Further, in a cause of action for trespass, it is not necessary to allege that the defendants'intrusions onto the property were unauthorized and without her consent. (Perkins v. Blauth (1912) 163 Cal.782, 786, 127 P. 50.)
5. The Cause of Action for Intentional Infliction of Emotional DistressTo state a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff must allege conduct by the
defendant that is "extreme and outrageous" and that is performed "with the intention of causing, or recklessdisregard of the probability of causing, emotional distress."(Cervantez v. J.C. Penney Co. (1979) 24 Cal.3d 579,593, 156 Cal.Rptr. 198, 595 P.2d 975.)"Conduct to be outrageous must be so extreme as to exceed all bounds ofthat usually tolerated in a civilized community. [Citations.]" (Ibid.)
[11] In the instant case, the conduct alleged by plaintiff which she claims constitutes an intentional infliction ofemotional distress is defendants' assessment of fines against her so as "to force plaintiff to sell her unit atunreasonable prices or alternatively to force plaintiff to remove her cats ... from the premises," cats which shedescribes as clean, living inside her condominium only and not constituting a nuisance. We have no troubleconcluding, as a matter of law, that this conduct is not so extreme and outrageous as to permit recovery in a cause of
http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1972102906&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1972102906&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1972102906&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1972102906&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1972102906&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1972102906&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=660&SerialNum=1912006495&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=660&SerialNum=1912006495&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=660&SerialNum=1912006495&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=660&SerialNum=1912006495&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=660&SerialNum=1912006495&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1972102906&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=227&SerialNum=1972102906&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1945112013&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000298&DocName=CACIS1354&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=660&SerialNum=1912006495&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=660&SerialNum=1912006495&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=661&SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1979124305&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.78&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Westlaw&FN=_top -
7/29/2019 Nahrstedt Court of Appeal.doc
9/15
action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. (Fuentes v. Perez(1977) 66 Cal.App.3d 163, 172, 136Cal.Rptr. 275.)
Additionally, plaintiff has not shown how this cause of action could be amended to allege facts that would either (1)as a matter of law, constitute extreme and outrageous conduct or (2) be sufficient to permit a jury to find intentionalinfliction of emotional distress.(Fuentes v. Perez, supra, 66 Cal.App.3d at p.
