Nottbohm

Nottbohm v. Thompson CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 10, 2016F071124California4,364 words

Opinion

Opinion

Poochigian, J.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs sued several defendants alleging they were responsible for poor conditions at the Modesto Inn. Some of the defendants owned and operated the Modesto Inn, and they are not parties to this appeal. Respondents in the present appeal own the land on which the Modesto Inn was situated but claim to have never possessed, owned, or controlled the Inn itself. The trial court granted summary judgment, and we affirm.

FACTS

Allegations in the Second Amended Complaint In a second amended complaint (hereafter, “the complaint”), plaintiffs/appellants Dana Nottbohm, Alyssa Nottbohm, John Victorino, and Geanne Welch brought various claims against several defendants on behalf of themselves and a putative class. Among the defendants named in the suit were respondents in the present appeal: Sean Trevor Thompson, Christina Callahan, John E. Curtis, Melanie Thompson Curtis, Melissa Lindell and Sheldon Thompson1. We will refer to respondents collectively as the “Landowner Defendants.” The complaint also named Anand Patel dba Modesto Inn, Chiman Patel, and Jai Jalaram Investment, LLC as defendants. We will refer to these defendants – who are not respondents in the present appeal…

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.