Preview
02-CV-24-4944 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 8/27/2024 1:22 PM STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF ANOKA TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT HOUSING COURT Northtown Village LLLP 579 Selby Avenue Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 EVICTION ACTION COMPLAINT Plaintiff, vs. Court File No. Beverly Ann Crusoe Robinson: John Doe; Jane Doe 7839 University Ave NE, #301 Spring Lake Park, MN 55432 Defendant(s). My true and correct name is Kathleen Tiaden, I am the Attorney for the Plaintiff in theabove-captioned proceeding, and I state under oath that the information contained in thisComplaint is true and correct to the best of my knowledge: 1 Property Information: a. 7839 University Ave NE, #301 Spring Lake Park, Minnesota 55432 b. The lease includes a garage (18a).2. About the Pai a. Plaintiff (Landlord): Northtown Village LLLP b. Defendant(s): Beverly Ann Crusoe Robinson 12/09/19693. Lease Information: a. Lease Start Date —- September 1, 2023 b. Lease End Date — August 31, 2024 c. Monthly Obligation — $1,440.00, due on the first day of the month.4. Statutory Compliance: Plaintiff, having present right of possession of said property, has complied with Minn. Stat. § 504B.181: Disclosing to the Defendant(s) either in the rental agreement or otherwise in writing prior to beginning of the tenancy the name and address of the person authorized to manage the property, and a landlord or agent authorized by the landlord to accept service of process and receive and give receipt for notices and demands, and the required information was posted in a conspicuous location, namely the building entrance/lobby.02-CV-24-4944 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 8/27/2024 1:22 PM5. Subsidies: Upon information and belief, this tenancy is not affected by a federal or state housing subsidy program through project-based federal assistance payments; the Section 8 program, as defined in section 469.002, subdivision 24; the low-income housing tax credit program; or any other similar program. Reason for Eviction: Non-Payment of Rent (504B.291) Defendant(s) failed to pay rent in full, and as of August 27, 2024, Defendant(s) are in arrears $851.16, calculated as follows: Rent and/or Late Fees for August 2024 in violation of first page and section | of lease agreement = $851.16 In addition, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 504B.291, Defendant(s) are required to pay any additional rent then in arrears, plus costs and expenses of $408.00 (includes the court filing fee of $303.00, legal process and service fees of $100.00, and $5.00 in attorney fees), and perform any other covenants of the lease, prior to Defendant(s) redeeming and being restored to possession. Plaintiff does not waive the right to seek collection, payment, or other legal action for any amount(s) not pled above. A pre-eviction notice, attached, was delivered to Defendant(s) pursuant to Minnesota Statute section 504B.321, subd. la. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 504B.345, subd. 1(a), Plaintiff seeks immediate judgment against the above Defendant(s) for restitution of said premises, and immediate writ of recovery of said premises, plus costs and disbursem*nts herein. Verification and Affidavit of Non Military Status I, Kathleen Tiaden, being sworn/affirmed, state that I am the Plaintiff's Attorney in thisaction, that I have read the complaint and that it is true to the best of my knowledge; thatDefendant(s) is/are not now in the military service of the United States, to the best of myinformation and belief. I acknowledge that costs, disbursem*nts, and reasonable attorney andwitness fees may be awarded pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 549.211, Subd. (2), to the partyagainst whom the allegations in these pleadings are asserted. I declare under penalty of perjurythat everything I have stated in this document is true and correct. Minn. Stat. § 358.116. Landlord Resource Network, LLC Dated: _August 27, 2024 4s/ Kathleen Tiaden Kathleen Tiaden (#0397217) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) SS. 225 S. 6th Street, Suite 3900 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Minneapolis, MN 55402 Phone: 612-314-3177 kathleen @landlordresource.net Attorney for Plaintiff02-CV-24-4944 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 8/27/2024 1:22 PM NOTICE OF OCCUPANCY RIGHTS UNDER U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT OMB Approval No. 2577-0286 Expires 06/30/2017 Northtown Village LLLP Notice of Occupancy Rights under the Violence Against Women Act!To all Tenants and ApplicantsThe Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) provides protections for victims of domestic violence,dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. VAWA protections are not only available to women,but are available equally to all individuals regardless of sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation.The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is the Federal agency thatoversees that Northtown Village LLLP is in compliance with VAWA. This notice explains yourrights under VAWA. A HUD-approved certification form is attached to this notice. You can fillout this form to show that you are or have been a victim of domestic violence, dating violence,sexual assault, or stalking, and that you wish to use your rights under VAWA."Protections for ApplicantsIf you otherwise qualify for assistance under the programs at Northtown Village LLLP, you cannotbe denied admission or denied assistance because you are or have been a victim of domesticviolence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking.Protections for TenantsIf you are receiving assistance under the programs at Northtown Village LLLP, you may not bedenied assistance, terminated from participation, or be evicted from your rental housing becauseyou are or have been a victim of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking.Also, if you or an affiliated individual of yours is or has been the victim of domestic violence,dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking by a member of your household or any guest, you maynot be denied rental assistance or occupancy rights under the programs at Northtown VillageLLLP, solely on the basis of criminal activity directly relating to that domestic violence, datingviolence, sexual assault, or stalking.Affiliated individual means your spouse, parent, brother, sister, or child, or a person to whom youstand in the place of a parent or guardian (for example, the affiliated individual is in your care,custody, or control); or any individual, tenant, or lawful occupant living in your household.Removing the Abuser or Perpetrator from the HouseholdNorthtown Village LLLP may divide (bifurcate) your lease in order to evict the individual orterminate the assistance of the individual who has engaged in criminal activity (the abuser orperpetrator) directly relating to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking.' Despite the name of this law, VAWA protection is ay ilable regardless of sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation.? Housing providers cannot discriminate on the basis of any protected characterist including race, color, nationalorigin, religion, sex, familial status, disability, or age. HUD-assisted and HUD-insured housing must be madeavailable to all otherwise eligible individuals regardless of actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, ormarital status. Form HUD-5380 (12/2016)02-CV-24-4944 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 8/27/2024 1:22 PM 22If Northtown Village LLLP chooses to remove the abuser or perpetrator, Northtown Village LLLPmay not take away the rights of eligible tenants to the unit or otherwise punish the remainingtenants. If the evicted abuser or perpetrator was the sole tenant to have established eligibility forassistance under the program, Northtown Village LLLP must allow the tenant who is or has beena victim and other household members to remain in the unit for a period of time, in order toestablish eligibility under the program or under another HUD housing program covered byVAWA, or, find alternative housing.In removing the abuser or perpetrator from the household, Northtown Village LLLP must followFederal, State, and local eviction procedures. In order to divide a lease, Northtown Village LLLPmay, but is not required to, ask you for documentation or certification of the incidences of domesticviolence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking.Moving to Another UnitUpon your request, Northtown Village LLLP may permit you to move to another unit, subject tothe availability of other units, and still keep your assistance. In order to approve a request,Northtown Village LLLP may ask you to provide documentation that you are requesting to movebecause of an incidence of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. If therequest is a request for emergency transfer, the housing provider may ask you to submit a writtenrequest or fill out a form where you certify that you meet the criteria for an emergency transferunder VAWA. The criteria are: (1) You are a victim of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. If your housing provider does not already have documentation that you are a victim of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, your housing provider may ask you for such documentation, as described in the documentation section below. (2) You expressly request the emergency transfer. Your housing provider may choose to require that you submit a form, or may accept another written or oral request. (3) You reasonably believe you are threatened with imminent harm from further violence if you remain in your current unit. This means you have a reason to fear that if you do not receive a transfer you would suffer violence in the very near future. OR You are a victim of sexual assault and the assault occurred on the premises during the 90-calendar-day period before you request a transfer. If you are a victim of sexual assault, then in addition to qualifying for an emergency transfer because you reasonably believe you are threatened with imminent harm from further violence if you remain in your unit, you may qualify for an emergency transfer if the sexual assault occurred on the premises of the property from which Form HUD-5380 (12/2016)02-CV-24-4944 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 8/27/2024 1:22 PM 3 you are seeking your transfer, and that assault happened within the 90-calendar-day period before you expressly request the transfer.Northtown Village LLLP will keep confidential requests for emergency transfers by victims ofdomestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, and the location of any move bysuch victims and their families.If you need information on an emergency transfer plan, please contact management at Vista ViewTownhomes II.Documenting You Are or Have Been a Victim of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, SexualAssault or StalkingNorthtown Village LLLP can, but is not required to, ask you to provide documentation to "certify"that you are or have been a victim of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking.Such request from Northtown Village LLLP must be in writing, and Northtown Village LLLPmust give you at least 14 business days (Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays do not count)from the day you receive the request to provide the documentation. Northtown Village LLLP may,but does not have to, extend the deadline for the submission of documentation upon your request.You can provide one of the following to Northtown Village LLLP as documentation. It is yourchoice which of the following to submit if Northtown Village LLLP asks you to providedocumentation that you are or have been a victim of domestic violence, dating violence, sexualassault, or stalking. A complete HUD-approved certification form given to you by Northtown Village LLLP with this notice, that documents an incident of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. The form will ask for your name, the date, time, and location of the incident of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, and a description of the incident. The certification form provides for including the name of the abuser or perpetrator if the name of the abuser or perpetrator is known and is safe to provide. A record of a Federal, State, tribal, territorial, or local law enforcement agency, court, or administrative agency that documents the incident of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. Examples of such records include police reports, protective orders, and restraining orders, among others. A statement, which you must sign, along with the signature of an employee, agent, or volunteer of a victim service provider, an attorney, a medical professional or a mental health professional (collectively, "professional") from whom you sought assistance in addressing domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, or the effects of abuse, and with the professional selected by you attesting under penalty of perjury that he or she believes that the incident or incidents of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking are grounds for protection. Any other statement or evidence that Northtown Village LLLP has agreed to accept. Form HUD-5380 (12/2016)02-CV-24-4944 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 8/27/2024 1:22 PM 4If you fail or refuse to provide one of these documents within the 14 business days, NorthtownVillage LLLP does not have to provide you with the protections contained in this notice.If Northtown Village LLLP receives conflicting evidence that an incident of domestic violence,dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking has been committed (such as certification forms fromtwo or more members of a household each claiming to be a victim and naming one or more of theother petitioning household members as the abuser or perpetrator), Northtown Village LLLP hasthe right to request that you provide third-party documentation within thirty 30 calendar days inorder to resolve the conflict. If you fail or refuse to provide third-party documentation where thereis conflicting evidence, Northtown Village LLLP does not have to provide you with the protectionscontained in this notice.ConfidentialityNorthtown Village LLLP must keep confidential any information you provide related to theexercise of your rights under VAWA, including the fact that you are exercising your rights underVAWA.Northtown Village LLLP must not allow any individual administering assistance or other serviceson behalf of Vista View Townhomes II (for example, employees and contractors) to have accessto confidential information unless for reasons that specifically call for these individuals to haveaccess to this information under applicable Federal, State, or local law.Northtown Village LLLP must not enter your information into any shared database or discloseyour information to any other entity or individual. Northtown Village LLLP, however, maydisclose the information provided if: e You give written permission to Northtown Village LLLP to release the information on a time limited basis. Northtown Village LLLP needs to use the information in an eviction or termination proceeding, such as to evict your abuser or perpetrator or terminate your abuser or perpetrator from assistance under this program. A law requires Northtown Village LLLP or your landlord to release the information.VAWA does not limit Northtown Village LLLP duty to honor court orders about access to orcontrol of the property. This includes orders issued to protect a victim and orders dividing propertyamong household members in cases where a family breaks up.Reasons a Tenant Eligible for Occupancy Rights under VAWA May Be Evicted or AssistanceMay Be TerminatedYou can be evicted and your assistance can be terminated for serious or repeated lease violationsthat are not related to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking committedagainst you. However, Northtown Village LLLP cannot hold tenants who have been victims ofdomestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking to a more demanding set of rulesthan it applies to tenants who have not been victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexualassault, or stalking. Form HUD-5380 (12/2016)02-CV-24-4944 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 8/27/2024 1:22 PM 5The protections described in this notice might not apply, and you could be evicted and yourassistance terminated, if Northtown Village LLLP can demonstrate that not evicting you orterminating your assistance would present a real physical danger that: 1) Would occur within an immediate time frame, and 2) Could result in death or serious bodily harm to other tenants or those who work on the property.If Northtown Village LLLP can demonstrate the above, Northtown Village LLLP should onlyterminate your assistance or evict you if there are no other actions that could be taken to reduce oreliminate the threat.Other LawsVAWA does not replace any Federal, State, or local law that provides greater protection for victimsof domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. You may be entitled to additionalhousing protections for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalkingunder other Federal laws, as well as under State and local laws.Non-Compliance with The Requirements of This NoticeYou may report a covered housing provider's violations of these rights and seek additionalassistance, if needed, by contacting or filing a complaint with the HUD Minneapolis Field Officeat (612) 370-3000.For Additional InformationYou may view a copy of HUD's final VAWA rule at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-11-16/pdf/2016-25888.pdf.Additionally Northtown Village LLLP must make a copy of HUD's VAWA regulations availableto you if you ask to see them.For questions regarding VAWA, please contact Amy Keller at (651) 389-3800.For help regarding an abusive relationship, you may call the National Domestic Violence Hotlineat 1-800-799-7233 or, for persons with hearing impairments, 1-800-787-3224 (TTY). You mayalso contact: Minnesota Coalition for Battered Women: (866) 223-1111 3 Battered Women Legal Advocacy Project: (800) 313-2666For tenants who are or have been victims of stalking seeking help may visit the National Centerfor Victims of Crime's Stalking Resource Center at https://www.victimsofcrime.org/our-programs/stalking-resource-center.For help regarding sexual assault, you may contact: Form HUD-5380 (12/2016)02-CV-24-4944 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 8/27/2024 1:22 PM 6 3 Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault: (651) 209-9993 we Minnesota Coalition for Battered Women: (866) 223-1111 - Battered Women Legal Advocacy Project: (800) 313-2666Victims of stalking seeking help may contact: - Minnesota Coalition for Battered Women: (866) 223-1111 as Battered Women Legal Advocacy Project: (800) 313-2666Attachment: Certification form HUD-5382 Form HUD-5380 (12/2016)02-CV-24-4944 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 8/27/2024 1:22 PM NOTICE OF OCCUPANCY RIGHTS UNDER U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT OMB Approval No. 2577-0286 Expires 06/30/2017CERTIFICATION OF U.S. Department of Housing OMB Approval No. 2577-0286DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, and Urban Development Exp. 06/30/2017DATING VIOLENCE,SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR STALKING,AND ALTERNATE DOCUMENTATIONPurpose of Form: The Violence Against Women Act ("VAWA") protects applicants, tenants, andprogram participants in certain HUD programs from being evicted, denied housing assistance, orterminated from housing assistance based on acts of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, orstalking against them. Despite the name of this law, VAWA protection is available to victims of domesticviolence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, regardless of sex, gender identity, or sexualorientation.Use of This Optional Form: If you are seeking VAWA protections from your housing provider, yourhousing provider may give you a written request that asks you to submit documentation about the incidentor incidents of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking.In response to this request, you or someone on your behalf may complete this optional form and submit itto your housing provider, or you may submit one of the following types of third-party documentation: (1) A document signed by you and an employee, agent, or volunteer of a victim service provider, an attorney, or medical professional, or a mental health professional (collectively, "professional") from whom you have sought assistance relating to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, or the effects of abuse. The document must specify, under penalty of perjury, that the profe sional believes the incident or incidents of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking occurred and meet the definition of "domestic violence,” "dating violence," "sexual assault,” or "stalking" in HUD's regulations at 24 CFR 5.2003. (2) A record of a Federal, State, tribal, territorial or local law enforcement agency, court, or administrative agency; or (3) At the discretion of the housing provider, a statement or other evidence provided by the applicant or tenant.Submission of Documentation: The time period to submit documentation is 14 business days from thedate that you receive a written request from your housing provider asking that you provide documentationof the occurrence of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. Your housingprovider may, but is not required to, extend the time period to submit the documentation, if you request anextension of the time period. If the requested information is not received within 14 business days of whenyou received the request for the documentation, or any extension of the date provided by your housingprovider, your housing provider does not need to grant you any of the VAWA protections. Distribution orissuance of this form does not serve as a written request for certification.Confidentiality: All information provided to your housing provider concerning the incident(s) ofdomestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking shall be kept confidential and such detailsshall not be entered into any shared database. Employees of your housing provider are not to have accessto these details unless to grant or deny VAWA protections to you, and such employees may not disclosethis information to any other entity or individual, except to the extent that disclosure is: (i) consented toby you in writing in a time- mited release; (ii) required for use in an eviction proceeding or hearingregarding termination of ince; or (iii) otherwise required by applicable law. Form HUD-5382 (12/2016)02-CV-24-4944 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 8/27/2024 1:22 PM 8TO BE COMPLETED BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE VICTIM OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE,DATING VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR STALKING1. Date the written request is received by victim:2. Name of victim:3 Your name (if different from victim's):4. Name(s) of other family member(s) listed on the lease:5. Residence of victim:6. Name of the accused perpetrator (if known and can be safely disclosed):Ts Relationship of the accused perpetrator to the victim:8. Date(s) and times(s) of incident(s) (if known):10. Location of incident(s): In your own words, briefly describe the incident(s):This is to certify that the information provided on this form is true and correct to the best of my knowledgeand recollection, and that the individual named above in Item 2 is or has been a victim of domestic violence,dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. I acknowledge that submission of false information couldjeopardize program eligibility and could be the basis for denial of admission, termination of assistance, oreviction.Signature Signed on (Date)Public Reporting Burden: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated toaverage | hour per response. This includes the time for collecting, reviewing, and reporting the data. Theinformation provided is to be used by the housing provider to request certification that the applicant ortenant is a victim of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. The information issubject to the confidentiality requirements of VAWA. This agency may not collect this information, andyou are not required to complete this form, unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management andBudget control number. Form HUD-5382 (12/2016)02-CV-24-4944 Filed in District Court State of MinnesotaResident Ledger 8/27/2024 1:22 PMREAL ESTATE EQUITIESDate: 08/27/2024(Code 10024383 [Property nor |lease From 09/01/2023Name Beverly Ann Crusoe Robinson Unit 7839301 [Lease To 08/31/2024Address 7839 University Ave NE, #301 Status Current [Move In 07/01/2010 Rent 1390.00 [Move Out(City Spring Lake Park, MN 55432 [Phone (H) (763) 561-1493 ‘Phone (W) Date Chg Code Description Charge | Payment! Balance Chg/Rec 05/11/2010 sd Security Deposit 300.00 300.00 1026656 05/11/2010 app Application Fee 32.00 332.00 1026657 05/11/2010 app Roommate 1 Application Fee 32.00 364.00 | 1026658 05/14/2010 chk# 4058 64.00 300.00 887953 07/01/2010 rent Rent for 31 days 825.00 1,125.00 1040302 07/01/2010 gar garage for 31 days 35.00 1,160.00 1040303 07/02/2010 chk# 4071 860.00 300.00 897646 07/02/2010 chk# 4057 300.00 0.00 897668 07/12/2010 resrel move in card (6.00) (5.00) 1041745 08/01/2010 rent Resident Rent (08/2010) 825.00 820.00 1045554 08/01/2010 gar Garage Rent (08/2010) 35.00 855.00 | 1045555 08/05/2010 chk# 4075 860.00 (6.00) 905406 09/01/2010 rent Resident Rent (09/2010) 825.00 820.00 1053266 09/01/2010 gar Garage Rent (09/2010) 35.00 855.00 1053267 09/01/2010 resrel 2010 national night out (200.00) 655.00 | 1055481. 09/02/2010 chk# 4089 660.00 (5.00) 909708 09/08/2010 resrel bank fee for early deposit (35.00) (40.00) 1056773 10/01/2010 rent Resident Rent (10/2010) 825.00 785.00 1061011 10/01/2010 gar Garage Rent (10/2010) 35.00 820.00 1061012 10/04/2010 chk# 4098 825.00 6.00) 916816 11/01/2010 rent Resident Rent (11/2010) 825.00 820.00 1068448 11/01/2010 gar Garage Rent (11/2010) 35.00 855.00 1068449 11/01/2010 resrel Resident Relations (20.00) 835.00 1072007 11/04/2010 chk# 4106 840.00 (6.00) 12/01/2010 rent Resident Rent (12/2010) 825.00 820.00 075960 12/01/2010 gar Garage Rent (12/2010) 35.00 855.00 07596: 12/05/2010 chk# 4118 590.00 265.00 930105 12/05/2010 chk# 3123 250.00 15.00 930119 01/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (01/2011) 825.00 840.00 1083728 01/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (01/2011) 35.00 875.00 1083729 01/05/2011 chk# 4113 840.00 35.00 936377 02/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (02/2011) 825.00 860.00 1091014 02/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (02/2011) 35.00 895.00 1091015 02/04/2011 chk# 4129 895.00 0.00 942128 03/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (03/2011) 825.00 825.00 1097255 03/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (03/2011) 35.00 860.00 1097256 03/07/2011 chk# 4138 830.00 30.00 948077 04/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (04/2011) 825.00 855.00 1104034 04/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (04/2011) 35.00 890.00 1104035 04/04/2011 chk# 4137 890.00 0.00 05/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (05/2011) 825.00 825.00 1110666 05/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (05/2011) 35.00 860.00 1110667 05/05/2011 chk# 4132 860.00 0.00 59225 06/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (06/2011) 825.00 825.00 111757802-CV-24-494406/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (06/2011) 35.00 FHA. GOs tier Sotiet06/06/2011 late Late Charges 50.00 oping Moses06/07/2011 late paid on time 6/5/11 (50.00) 860.00 Tisueae)06/07/2011 chk# 4160 872.00 (12.00) 96520606/30/2011 resrel pre pay balance 12.00 0.00 112197207/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (07/2011) 837.00 837.00 112442707/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (07/2011) 35.00 872.00 112442807/06/2011 late Late Charges, 8% of $872.00 69.76 941.76 112760607/06/2011 late paid on time (69.76) 872.00 112791607/06/2011 chk# 4170 872.00 0.00 17034308/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (08/2011) 837.00 837.00 113309908/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (08/2011) 35.00 872.00 u 108/04/2011 chk# 4176 872.00 0.00 97607409/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (09/2011) 837.00 837.00 114165809/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (09/2011) 35.00 872.00 114165909/02/2011 chk# 4186 872.00 0.00 98136710/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (10/2011) 837.00 837.00 14962810/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (10/2011) 35.00 872.00 114962910/06/2011 chk# 4196 872.00 0.00 98971111/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (11/2011) 837.00 837.00 115709611/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (11/2011) 35.00 872.00 115709711/04/2011 chk# 4202 872.00 0.00 99471412/01/2011 rent Resident Rent (12/2011) 837.00 837.00 116428112/01/2011 gar Garage Rent (12/2011) 35.00 872.00 i12/02/2011 chk# 4209 872.00 0.00 99870101/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (01/2012) 837.00 837.00 17056601/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (01/2012) 35.00 872.00 117056701/03/2012 chk# 4218 872.00 0.00 100400902/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (02/2012) 837.00 837.00 118146702/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (02/2012) 35.00 872.00 118146802/06/2012 chk# 4235 872.00 0.00 10139703/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (03/2012) 837.00 837.00 19093303/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (03/2012) 35.00 872.00 119093403/05/2012 chk# 4242 872.00 0.00 102076904/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (04/2012) 837.00 837.00 120031004/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (04/2012) 35.00 872.00 12 1104/03/2012 chk# 4247 872.00 0.00 | 102833704/09/2012 app app fee 32.00 32.00 120639605/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (05/2012) 837.00 869.00 120990505/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (05/2012) 35.00 904.00 420990605/04/2012 chk# 4253 872.00 32.00 1 778105/04/2012 chkit 4256 32.00 0.00 103778206/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (06/2012) 837.00 837.00 121938906/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (06/2012) 35.00 872.00 121939006/04/2012 chk# 4261 872.00 0.00 104391807/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (07/2012) 879.00 879.00 122934907/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (07/2012) 35.00 914.00 122935007/05/2012 chk# 4266 879.00 35.00 105350307/06/2012 late Late Charges, 8% of $35.00 2.80 37.80 12 7408/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (08/2012) 879.00 916.80 123925808/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (08/2012) 35.00 951.80 123925908/06/2012 fate Late Charges, 8% of $476.80 38.14 989.94 124405608/06/2012 chk# 4280 475.00 514.94 106224708/14/2012 chk# 4281 475.00 39.94 106430008/14/2012 chk# 4283 39.94 0.00 106430209/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (09/2012) 879.00 879.00 124844509/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (09/2012) 35.00 914.00 | 1248446 19/04/2012 chk# 4284 915.00 (7.00) | 106738910/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (10/2012) 879.00 878.00 125812710/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (10/2012) 35.00 913.00 25812810/04/2012 chk# 4288 915.00 (2.00) 07718411/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (11/2012) 879.00 877.00 12 7402-CV-24-494411/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (11/2012) 35.00 Falea. GODS RACH11/05/2012 chk# 4292 915.00 aig gt12/01/2012 rent Resident Rent (12/2012) 879.00 B6012/01/2012 gar Garage Rent (12/2012) 35.00 911.00 127768412/05/2012 chk# 4298 915.00 (4.00) 109278101/01/2013 rent Resident Rent (01/2013) 879.00 875.00 128653701/01/2013 gar Garage Rent (01/2013) 35.00 910.00 128653801/04/2013 chk# 4303 915.00 6.00) 109976902/01/2013 rent Resident Rent (02/2013) 879.00 874.00 129628202/01/2013 gar Garage Rent (02/2013) 35.00 909.00 129628302/06/2013 late Late Charges, 8% of $909.00 72.72 981.72 130214502/06/2013 late not late (72.72) 909.00 131205802/06/2013 chk# 4307 915.00 (6.00) 111032103/01/2013 rent Resident Rent (03/2013) 879.00 873.00 130585203/01/2013 gar Garage Rent (03/2013) 35.00 908.00 130585303/05/2013 chk# 4312 915.00 (7.00) 11865603/06/2013 late Late Charges, 8% of $65.72 5.26 (1,74) 31101104/01/2013 rent Resident Rent (04/2013) 879.00 877.26 131562804/01/2013 gar Garage Rent (04/2013) 35.00 912.26 131562904/05/2013 chk# 4317 915.00 (2.74) 112698005/01/2013 rent Resident Rent (05/2013) 879.00 876.26 132565005/01/2013 gar Garage Rent (05/2013) 35.00 911.26 13. 105/03/2013 chk# 4325 915.00 (3.74) 113429406/01/2013 rent Resident Rent (06/2013) 879.00 875.26 133641906/01/2013 gar Garage Rent (06/2013) 35.00 910.26 133642006/05/2013 chk# 4331 915.00 (4.74) 114319307/01/2013 rent Resident Rent (07/2013) 910.00 905.26 134640107/01/2013 gar Garage Rent (07/2013) 35.00 940.26 134640207/03/2013 chk# 4337
Related Contentin Anoka County
Case
Restwood Terrace MHC, LLC vs Donald Wayne Blanchette
Aug 22, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4832
Case
Centerspace LP vs Paul Harris
Aug 20, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4785
Case
PFS MHC LLC vs Terri Jo Storm, Dominique Reff
Aug 23, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4865
Case
South Fridley Apartments LLC, KJ Management LLC vs Jessica Shackle, Hani El Madni Moustafa, et. al.
Aug 19, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4772
Case
Planet Home Lending, LLC vs Christian McClellan, John Doe, Mary Roe
Aug 19, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4753
Case
Village Plaza Apartments LLC vs Donald Deshawn Porter, Nicole Chrishonna Porter, Samaria Porter
Aug 22, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4846
Case
Blaine Apartments Group LLC vs Kyle Engelstad
Aug 21, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4800
Case
Winnetka Investments, LLC. vs Manuel Siavichay Bravo, Marisol Tenesaca
Aug 21, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4824
Case
Woodland North Apartments LP vs Sarina Flowers, John Doe, Jane Doe
Aug 19, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4760
Ruling
Nathanial Gonzalez vs. Najafi Enterprises, LLC
Aug 20, 2024 |23CECG03529
Re: Gonzalez v. Najafi Enterprises, LLC Superior Court Case No. 23CECG03529Hearing Date: August 20, 2024 (Dept. 503)Motion: Default Prove-UpTentative Ruling: To continue to Thursday, September 12, 2023, at 3:30 p.m. in Department 503. Anynew filings for this continued hearing must be done on or before September 5, 2024.Explanation: No Request for Court Judgment Plaintiff has not filed, and served on defendants, the Request for Court Judgment(Judicial Council form CIV-100), which is mandatory. (Simke, Chodos, Silberfeld & Anteau,Inc. v Athans (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 1275, 1287; Candelaria v. Avitia (1990) 219Cal.App.3d 1436, 1444.) While plaintiffs used this form when requesting default, this dual-purpose form must be used again when requesting judgment. The “Application for Entryof Default Judgment” plaintiff filed, while containing useful information, does notsubstitute for the use of the CIV-100 form. No Lis Pendens Code of Civil Procedure section 761.010, subdivision (b) provides that immediatelyupon commencement of a quiet title action, plaintiff “shall file” a notice of pendency ofaction (lis pendens) in the office of the recorder. The complaint does not state thatplaintiff has recorded a lis pendens, nor is there a lis pendens filed in this action. The failureto record a lis pendens does not deprive the court of jurisdiction to enter a quiet titlejudgment. (Rutledge v. Rutledge (1953) 119 Cal.App.2d 114, 120 (failure to record lispendens does not deprive court of jurisdiction [there, a partition action]).) However, thisfailure can result in subsequent bona fide purchasers and encumbrancers of record notbeing bound by the judgment quieting title. (See Code Civ. Proc., §§ 764.030, 764.045,subd. (a);1 If plaintiff desires the protection a lis pendens affords and needs more time thanthe above continuance allows, he may request a longer continuance.1Also,service by publication is ineffective unless a lis pendens is recorded. (Code Civ. Proc., §763.020, subd. (b).) However, since plaintiff has dismissed the “unknown” defendants and thus didnot publish, this is not an issue here. No Costs on Default Plaintiff has filed a memorandum of costs and asked for costs in the proposedjudgment. However, in a quiet title action a plaintiff cannot recover costs against adefendant who disclaims an interest in the property or allows a default judgment to betaken against him. (Code Civ. Proc. § 761.030, subd. (b); Bulwer Consol. Mining Co. v.Standard Consol. Mining Co. (1890) 83 Cal. 589, 597.) Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312(a), and Code of Civil Proceduresection 1019.5, subdivision (a), no further written order is necessary. The minute orderadopting this tentative ruling will serve as the order of the court and service by the clerkwill constitute notice of the order.Tentative RulingIssued By: jyh on 8/19/24 . (Judge’s initials) (Date)
Ruling
EDITH LIBERATORE VS THE 4455 FULTON HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL.
Aug 22, 2024 |22VECV00768
Case Number: 22VECV00768 Hearing Date: August 22, 2024 Dept: T 22VECV00768 Liberatore v The 4455 Fulton Tentative ruling: Ex parte to intervene is granted. The answer in intervention shall be served and filed within 20 days. The court will continue the trial and FSC for approximately 60-90 days but will not allow any extension of the discovery cutoff.
Ruling
Sol Selection, LLC vs. All persons unknown
Aug 24, 2024 |23CV-0203591
SOL SELECTION, LLC VS. ALL PERSONS UNKNOWNCase Number: 23CV-0203591This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of default judgment. On June 5, 2024, thisCourt issued its Ruling after a June 3, 2024 Default Prove Up hearing. The Court denied therequest to enter default judgment without prejudice. Nothing further has been filed. Anappearance is necessary on today’s calendar to provide the Court with a status of defaultjudgment.
Ruling
1355 BEREA, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS YARDEN CONSULTING, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.
Aug 22, 2024 |6/18/2022 |24SMCV02409
Case Number: 24SMCV02409 Hearing Date: August 22, 2024 Dept: I The motion to expunge is CONTINUED. Plaintiff filed a wrongful foreclosure action against defendants. Plaintiff also filed a lis pendends on the theory that if it prevails, it is seeking the property back. Defendants move to expunge the lis pendens and plaintiff opposes. A lis pendens is an evidentiary motion. The court does not rely on the pleadings alone; it can (and should) consider evidence. Further, unlike a summary judgment motion, the court is to weigh the evidence to determine whether the plaintiff is likely to succeed or not. Here, many of the facts are not disputed. In 2023, plaintiff obtained a loan from defendant for $220,000. The property in question was security for the loan and plaintiff signed a Deed of Trust in defendants favor. There were two other loans. One was with First Bridge, and there was a second as well. There is some debate as to the loans priority. Plaintiff contends that they were all equal in rank, but defendant contends that it was in the third position with First Bridge in the first, or senior, position. For these purposes, though, the court is willing to assume that the issue is not material. The First Bridge loan was what it sounds like: a bridge loan. It was for a much larger sum than defendants loan. It was interest only for a relatively short time with a balloon payment due at the end. It is not really disputed that plaintiff did not make two of the interest only payments to First Bridge. However, First Bridge did not issue or record a Notice of Default. Even so, defendants learned of the nonpayment and elected to make the payments themselves to keep the First Bridge loan current. Defendants did so and then sent a Notice of Default to plaintiff, claiming a default on defendants loan and requiring plaintiff to pay defendants what defendants had paid First Bridge (although the number in the Notice of Default was higher than that). The basis for the default was plaintiffs default on the First Bridge loan and/or the failure to make the First Bridge payments. The notice of default was recorded in September 2023, stating that $89,345.85 was owed to defendants. Plaintiff did not cure the default or attempt to do so, which led defendants to record a Notice of Trustees Sale on December 22, 2023. That notice stated that the amount due to defendants was $574,962.79. The sale occurred on January 17, 2024, and a Trustees Deed Upon Sale was recorded on February 9, 2024. Defendants were the successful bidders. Plaintiff brings the instant action claiming that the foreclosure was wrongful and seeking (among other things) title to the property. In support of its position, plaintiff recorded a lis pendens. Defendants seek to expunge the lis pendens and plaintiff opposes. Plaintiff has objected to portions of the Valsky declaration. As to paragraph 12, Valsky states that defendants paid the monthly payments to First Bridge to protect defendants interest. The court believes Valsky has sufficient knowledge to make that statement. The objection is OVERRULED. There is another problem. Defendants submitted new evidence in reply. The court believes there is cause to allow that submission. If plaintiff really believes it needs to be able to respond to that evidence, the court will discuss it. (Plaintiff did object to it on this ground.) A lis pendens is a powerful tool. Because it is recorded, it puts the world on notice that the person holding title to the property might not have good title because the issue is being litigated. Accordingly, a buyer who buys the property after a lis pendens is filed buys with that knowledge and could be forced to give title to the plaintiff if the plaintiff ultimately prevails in the litigation even though the buyer is not a party to the litigation. Of course, the buyer might have recourse against the seller, but the buyer still loses the property. In contrast, but for the lis pendens, a buyer who is unaware of the litigation would be a buyer in due course and would take free and clear of the litigation. Because a seller cannot deliver clean title, a lis pendens has the practical effect (in many cases) of making the property unsaleable until the lis pendens is removed or significantly reducing the potential sale price. Moreover, a lis pendens can be recorded without judicial intervention or permission. A litigant simply files the papers and the deed (so to speak) is done. That is a powerful and inexpensive tool. The burden is on the defendant in the litigation to bring a motion to expunge the lis pendens, which will remain on the property until and unless that motion is granted (and for a while longer if there is an appeal). Motions to expunge a lis pendens are governed by CCP sections 405, et seq. To grant the motion, the court must make two findings (and then determine that a bond from plaintiff would not be a better option). The first is that the litigation, if successful, could effect title. The burden to show that is on the plaintiff, but it is often decided on the complaint alone. This makes obvious sense in that if the cause of action could not cause the plaintiff to have an interest in the property, then the lis pendens has no basis. The second finding is whether the claimant has not established by a preponderance of the evidence the probable validity of the real property claim. That is a bit oddly wordedthere is a sort of double negative. What it means is that although defendant is bringing the motion the burden of persuasion is on the plaintiff. If no one puts in any evidence of anything, the lis pendens will be expunged. Of course, the courts determination is not binding at trial; but it is final in the practical sense that if the motion is granted and the lis pendens is expunged (and the order is not reversed on appeal), then a buyer can take free and clear of the litigationeven if the buyer is aware of the litigation. Here, the first prong is easily met. If plaintiff prevails in the wrongful foreclosure action, the property might revert to plaintiff. After all, it is the defendant who allegedly wrongfully foreclosed and who now holds title through the allegedly wrongful foreclosure. If plaintiff succeeds, title could be restored. It is the second prong where the issue is joined. A major question is whether defendants actions to protect their security interest gave rise to a default under the documents. The relevant loan agreement provision states that a failure to pay on a timely basis, or the occurrence of any other default under any note, . . . constitutes a default under the agreement. In the event of a default, the contract allows defendants to act to protect their interest without notice, and that would include protecting against a foreclosure by First Bridge. The problem is in part that elsewhere, the following appears. [I]f there is any action or proceeding (including, without limitation, any judicial or nonjudicial proceeding to foreclose the lien of a junior or senior mortgage or deed of trust) affecting or purporting to affect the Mortgaged Property, this Security Instrument, Lenders security for the performance of the Obligations and payment of the Indebtedness, or the rights or powers of Lender or Trustee under the Loan Agreement, the Note or this Security Instrument, Lender or Trustee may (but is not obligated to) (a) make any such payment or do any such act in such manner and to such extent as either deems necessary to preserve or protect the Mortgaged Property . . . . The area of dispute is this. While there is no real dispute that plaintiff did not make two First Bridge interest payments, First Bridge never issued a notice of default. Defendants made the payments but not because the loan had been declared defaulted. According to plaintiff, that is fatal to defendants case because there was no action or proceeding that had been commenced toward foreclosing on the property. Plaintiffs reading is that defendants can advance the money to First Bridge only if the loan has been declared in default (and maybe not until a notice of sale is issued), not just because a payment has not been made. By way of hypothetical example, consider the situation where plaintiff had arranged with First Bridge to agree to give plaintiff 60 days grace to make two interest payments. That agreement would not be reflected in any County Recorders office document; it might be reflected only in an exchange of emails. It might well be that defendants would look and see that the payments were not made, but it would make little sense for defendants to be able to front the payment and then declare a default. Nor is that such a strange hypothetical. This was a bridge loanthe interest only payments mattered, but the loan was coming due shortly in any event. The question is whether the contract gave defendants the right to make payments on the other loans if plaintiff did not do so even if the lender elected not to declare the other loan to be in default. Defendants, on the other hand, contend that paragraph 7.1.12 (quoted above) of the loan documents is an independent event of defaultdifferent from the default that occurs if there is a proceeding (which is in paragraph 7.1.6). Thus, the defense claims, it is an alternative basis of a default, and that is sufficient. The weird and odd thing is that it is unclear that defendants right to make payments to secure its position, which can be found in paragraph 10 of the Deed of Trust (for example) arises not upon plaintiffs failure to make a payment to another lender, but rather when there is an action or proceeding instituted by another lender that might impair defendants position in the property. Thus, one might argue, it might have been proper for defendants to have claimed a default due to the nonpayment of interest on the First Bridge loan, but the cure would only be some agreement by First Bridge that it would not take any action on that basis (perhaps). The documents are not 100% clear to the court. The court believes that the better reading at least at this stage, is that defendants did not have the right to make the payment to First Bridge unilaterally and demand reimbursem*nt by plaintiff, at least given that First Bridge had not even declared a default. Under the law and the various contracts here, a junior (or co-equal) lender has plenty of time to protect its interest once a notice of default is issued. The notice is issued and there is a cure period. During that period, the junior (or co-equal) lender can cure the default and subrogate itself to declaring its own loan in default if the borrower does not reimburse. And that is the whole point. The point of allowing another lender to cure the other default is to protect the security and the other lenders security interest. Curing a default that has not been declared does not serve such a purpose. Worse, to allow it to occur discourages a borrower from trying to reach an accord with the other lender because even if the borrower reaches such an agreement, the junior (or co-equal) lender can nonetheless create a formal default and create an immediate financial obligation on the borrower. (Here, had the default been only the failure to make payments to First Bridge, the cure might have been nothing more than a letter from First Bridge that it was permitting the delay.) Because the courts reading of the contract allowed the defendants here to pay First Bridge and then declare a default only if First Bridge had first declared a default, at least based on the record thus far, the notice of default may have been flawed and hence the sale could be improper. All of that said, neither party really briefed this issue. Defendants just assume that they had the right to make the payment to First Bridge even though there is no evidence that they had contacted First Bridge to see if First Bridge even cared or was going to do something that might impair defendants collateral. But the documents are not quite that clear. Plaintiff, on the other hand, just assumes that defendants had no rights with regard to the First Bridge loan at all. The court would appreciate supplemental simultaneous briefs addressing this issue, with evidence if need be. There is a second problem. The amount of the default ought to have been essentially two months of interest. The notice of default, though, was almost $90,000, which seems higher than the amount actually paid by defendants to First Bridge. But even if defendants notice of default had the right amount (due to late fees), the notice of sale lists an amount six times greater. In fact, even if one adds in all of defendants outstanding loan balance the notice of trustees sale is about twice what the number should have been. Defendants have suggested no explanation for this that the court recalls seeing. Defendants counter by saying that the notice of trustee sale is valid whether or not the amount is correctthe amount is mere extra information. The court is not so sure. At least on this record, the court does not view what may be a very incorrect amount as a technical defect that it can so easily overlook. For example, if that is the amount due and owing under the loan at issue, one might well assume that the lender would submit a credit bid, which informs how the auction would go; if the amount is double the amount of the loan, then the credit bid would be different. If such is the case, then this provides an alternative reason to deny the motion. Again, there is not a lot of briefing on this. Defendants just assume this away, but they provide no authority that the amount set forth in the Notice of Trustees Sale is irrelevant. Plaintiff assumes that it must be relevant even though the property is going to be sold to the highest bidder at auction, and so the amount in that document is not really the cure amount needed to be paid by plaintiff to bring the loan current. The motion will be CONTINUED to allow that briefing. The court will discuss timing with the parties. Because there is no evidence that the property is declining in value or that defendants are suffering any immediate injury due to the lis pendens, the court is not inclined to require any bond at this moment. That may change at the next hearing.
Ruling
JACQUELINE MONIQUE RIVERA VS ALBERT N. AMADOR, JR., ET AL.
Sep 03, 2024 |23LBCV02166
Case Number: 23LBCV02166 Hearing Date: September 3, 2024 Dept: S27 Edward J. OReilly, attorney of record for Plaintiff, Jacqueline Monique Rivera, seeks to be relieved as counsel, declaring there has been a complete breakdown of the attorney-client relationship. The motion is denied without prejudice for two reasons. First, there is no proposed order, as required by CRC 3.1362(d) and (e) Second, Counsel declares Clients address is confirmed because office staff spoke with Client and Client did not provide a new address. It is not clear whether office staff even asked Client about a new address. Additionally, Counsel has no personal knowledge to declare what office staff asked or did not ask. If the motion is re-filed, specific information about how Clients address has been confirmed must be provided. The motion is denied. Counsel is ordered to give notice. Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at gdcdepts27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the partys email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If the parties do not submit on the tentative, they should arrange to appear remotely.
Ruling
KEITH HERRINGTON ET AL VS. ALFRED GOODWIN ET AL
Aug 23, 2024 |CGC23606480
Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for August 23, 2024 line 6. DEFENDANT PAUL GOODWIN MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT , Or In The Alternative, Motion For Summary Adjudication is OFF CALENDAR. Notice of Settlement on file. =(501/CFH) Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom (Video - Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; or Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252; Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849). Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required. Notice of contesting a tentative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not so notified, and the opposing party does not appear.
Ruling
Phillips vs. Murphy, et al.
Aug 21, 2024 |22CV-0201197
PHILLIPS VS. MURPHY, ET AL.Case Number: 22CV-0201197This matter is on calendar for review regarding status. The Court notes that since today’s hearingdate was set, the Court granted Plaintiff’s Motion for Court Order Appointing Real EstateAppraiser, and a future hearing date for Confirmation of Filing the Appraisal was set. Therefore,today’s review hearing is unnecessary, and is VACATED. The future hearing date forConfirmation of Filing the Appraisal on Monday, September 9, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. inDepartment 64 is confirmed. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.
Ruling
- GRESIO, TINA vs MYERS, BEVERLY J
Aug 24, 2024 |CV-24-004770
CV-24-004770 - GRESIO, TINA vs MYERS, BEVERLY J - Plaintiff's Motion For Preliminary Injunction Prohibiting Eviction, Encumbrances,and Sale Of Property Ccp526(A)(1)-(4); 527(A) - CONTINUED, at the moving party’s request, to October 9, 2024 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 23.
Document
Winnetka Investments, LLC. vs Manuel Siavichay Bravo, Marisol Tenesaca
Aug 21, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4824
Document
Blaine Apartments Group LLC vs Kyle Engelstad
Aug 21, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4800
Document
CMC 1 Meadows of Coon Rapids, LLC vs Donald Arisa
Aug 21, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4815
Document
Roers Fridley Apartments Owner II, LLC vs Keisuke Okmore
Aug 21, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4802
Document
Centerspace LP vs Paul Harris
Aug 20, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4785
Document
South Fridley Apartments LLC, KJ Management LLC vs Jessica Shackle, Hani El Madni Moustafa, et. al.
Aug 19, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4772
Document
Village Plaza Apartments LLC vs Donald Deshawn Porter, Nicole Chrishonna Porter, Samaria Porter
Aug 22, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4846
Document
South Fridley Apartments LLC, KJ Management LLC vs Jessica Shackle, Hani El Madni Moustafa, et. al.
Aug 19, 2024 |Open |Eviction (UD) |Eviction (UD) |02-CV-24-4772
