Hyatt

Hyatt v. Tedesco

Good Law
117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921·96 Cal. App. Supp. 4th 62
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 31, 2002BV 23290California1,891 words

Opinion

Opinion

P. McKAY, J.

This cause having been submitted for decision, and fully considered, judgment is ordered as follows:

The judgment is reversed. Appellant to recover costs on appeal.

Defendant and tenant Nora Tedesco (hereinafter appellant) timely appeals the judgment entered in favor of plaintiff and landlord Herb W. Hyatt (hereinafter plaintiff) following an unlawful detainer court trial.

On September 20, 2000, plaintiff filed an unlawful detainer action against appellant seeking possession of the premises, forfeiture of the agreement, past due rent and damages on the theory of nonpayment of rent.

On September 25, 2000, appellant filed her answer to the complaint. In her answer, appellant, among other things not germane to this appeal, denied the monthly rent amount as stated in the complaint, the amount of rent that was due and owing, and set forth the affirmative defense of breach of warranty of habitability. Appellant specifically alleged that the following conditions existed in the premises: leaking roof, missing bathtub tiles, windows not secure from the elements due to rotten frames, holes in the carpeting, cracks in the walls, security bars without release latches, water…

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.