Neagu

Neagu v. Kron CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 21, 2025G064978California2,638 words

Opinion

Opinion

Scott, J.

FACTS

Neagu leased a house to a substance use disorder treatment program. In 2023, a dispute arose about whether the tenants were honoring the lease and whether Neagu was “abus[ing]” her “landlord right to inspect” the property. The tenants hired cross-defendants Scott Aron Thompson Kron and his law firm, Kron & Card LLP to represent them. We will refer to cross- defendants collectively as “the law firm.” The ensuing chain of events included: a contentious November 30, 2023 telephone call between Kron and Neagu; Neagu serving the tenants with a December 2023 three-day notice to quit; Kron filing a December 11, 2023 civil harassment restraining order petition; the law firm “prevent[ing]” Neagu and her real estate agent from inspecting the property on March 27, 2024; and Kron’s physical presence at a March 29, 2024 inspection of the property noticed by Neagu. After the tenants sued Neagu in April 2024, Neagu filed a cross- complaint alleging causes of action against the law firm for intentional interference with contractual relations, interference with prospective economic advantage, and unfair business practices. These claims were supported by three types of acts.

1 All…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.