Ottovich

Department of Fair Employment & Housing v. Ottovich

Good Law
173 Cal. Rptr. 3d 881·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 574·227 Cal. App. 4th 706·2014 WL 2925254
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 30, 2014A136607California3,762 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rivera, J.

The Department of Fair Employment and Housing (the Department) brought this action against defendant Harvey Ottovich alleging he engaged in housing discrimination. After Ottovich engaged in abusive discovery tactics, the trial court sanctioned him by striking his answer to the complaint and entering a default judgment. The trial court later vacated the default, but continued to treat the answer as stricken. Treating the unanswered allegations of the complaint as judicially admitted, the trial court granted summary judgment to the Department on the issue of liability. A jury then assessed damages at $8,705. Ottovich has appealed the ensuing judgment. His primary contention is that the trial court was required to reinstate his answer at the time it vacated the default judgment. We shall affirm the judgment.

L BACKGROUND

In this action, the Department alleged that Ottovich owned or managed an apartment building in Fremont, California. He posted an advertisement for an apartment available for rent, and real party in interest Diane Coleman called him and expressed interest in the apartment. He asked who would be living in the apartment, and she told him she, her husband, and…

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.