Bearman

Villa Zinfandel v. Bearman

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 4, 2025A171987California6,332 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wilson, J.

I. BACKGROUND

In September 2022, Villa Zinfandel filed an unlawful detainer complaint against Bearman. The caption of the complaint stated that the case was a “Limited Civil Case.” The complaint alleged the following facts: Bearman or his predecessors executed a deed of trust secured by real property located in Saint Helena (the “Property”). They later defaulted under the terms of the deed of trust, and a notice of default was recorded. After Bearman or his predecessors failed to cure the default, a notice of trustee’s sale of the Property was recorded. The Property was sold to Bank of New York Mellon (BNYM) in compliance with Civil Code section 2924 et seq., and a trustee’s deed upon sale was recorded. BNYM sold the Property to Villa Zinfandel. As required by section 1161a, subdivision (b)(3), Villa Zinfandel served a three-day notice to quit upon Bearman. However, Bearman refused to relinquish possession of the Property. As a result, Villa Zinfandel sought holdover damages “at a daily rate” from the date of its complaint until the date that judgment was entered.

2 Throughout his brief, Bearman claims that the jurisdictional cap on

damages is $25,000. That was the case up…

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.