Munoz

Munoz v. MacMillan

Bad Law
124 Cal. Rptr. 3d 664·195 Cal. App. 4th 648·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 578
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 13, 2011No. G043402California5,895 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Ikola, J.

Landlord Alan MacMillan (the defendant in this action) previously sued tenant Concepcion Munoz (the plaintiff in this action) for unlawful detainer of commercial real property. Judgment was entered in favor of MacMillan, a writ of possession issued, and MacMillan evicted Munoz and took possession of the premises. Munoz appealed and won reversal of the judgment; the final judgment in the underlying action was silent with regard to possession of the premises and/or monetary restitution for the loss of Munoz’s tenancy. Munoz then instituted the instant action for breach of contract, in which she claims MacMillan breached the lease “by causing law enforcement officials to evict . . . Munoz in violation of the terms of the lease.”

We agree with Munoz that she was entitled to seek compensation for losses she allegedly incurred following enforcement of the erroneous initial judgment in the unlawful detainer action. Munoz could have suffered economic loss as a result of her eviction even if the eviction was not “wrongful” as a matter of tort law. Munoz’s most straightforward remedy was to seek restitution in the underlying unlawful detainer action, not to bring a subsequent…

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.