Singer

BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs do not challenge the court’s nonsuit ruling on their IIED claims; rather, they argue the court reversibly erred in granting nonsuit on their negligence claims.3 Plaintiffs argue they proffered facts that established Greystar owed them a duty supporting these claims on two distinct theories: one based on their special landlord-tenant relationship with Greystar, and another based on Greystar creating the risk of the harm plaintiffs suffered by allowing Watermarke apartments to be rented by Airbnb guests.

3 Plaintiffs’ appellate briefing does not include any argument regarding the IIED claims, and their reply brief expressly disclaims any argument on appeal regarding their IIED claims. We therefore understand plaintiffs’ counsel’s representations, made during the hearing before this court, that plaintiffs’ appeal includes the ruling on the IIED claim as referring to their argument that, because of purported judicial bias in the proceedings, the entire judgment must be reversed as a matter of due process.

3 A. Proffered Evidence In reviewing an order granting nonsuit at the conclusion of a plaintiff ’s opening statement, we, like the trial court, “ ‘ “must…