Cardenas

Cardenas v. Noren

Good Law
1 Cal. Rptr. 2d 367·1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 1294·235 Cal. App. 3d 1344·91 Daily Journal DAR 13864·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8981
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 8, 1991H007830California2,279 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cottle, J.

—Raul Corona Cardenas appeals the judgment of the trial court denying his petition for writ of mandate. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1085.) Appellant claims a writ should have issued to the sheriff ordering him to restore appellant to possession of certain real property because the sheriff wrongfully evicted him. Appellant contends his eviction was unlawful because although he was a tenant and a named defendant in an unlawful detainer action, he was never served with process or named in the default judgment. For the reasons stated below we affirm.

Facts

Appellant and Mercedes Dominguez were in possession of premises at 30 Hawthorne Avenue (front house) in Watsonville in Santa Cruz County. Real parties in interest Dean and Jeanell Montero (landlords) owned the property. The tenancy was month-to-month and the rent was $700 per month. On August 16, 1990, landlords brought a complaint in unlawful detainer against both appellant and Dominguez, alleging nonpayment of $100 of the monthly rent. Landlords alleged that they had served a three-day notice to pay rent or quit on August 10, 1990.

Landlords served and then took the default of Dominguez only. A “notice to vacate” in five days,…

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.