Johnson v. Dunn Investment Properties CA2/5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 17, 2021B305459California5,404 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

A. The Facts as Alleged in the Complaint and Shown by the Attached Lease Agreement 1. The lease On January 20, 2011, the Johnsons signed a lease to rent property located at 24773 Avenue Rockefeller in Valencia, California (the property) from Dunn Investment. The lease term ran from March 1, 2011, to July 31, 2016 (the “Expiration Date”). The lease specified a base rent of $7,411 for the first month and charged a security deposit but no other fees. A form rent adjustment addendum specified the rent to be paid over specified

2 periods from April 2012 through July 2016. According to the addendum, the rent owed from April 2015 to February 2016 was $8,744. The rent owed from March 2016 to July 2016 was $9,634. The lease included various terms addressing the parties’ respective responsibilities for upkeep of the property and its various components. For example, the lease specified Dunn Investment warranted existing elements on the property, including the HVAC system, were in good condition on the date the lease commenced. It also stated that if one of the systems were to fail during the warranty period, Dunn Investment would rectify the failure at its expense once…

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.