Vu
Vu v. Yang CA2/4
Opinion
Opinion
INTRODUCTION
Respondent Hannah Vu leased an office property in the City of El Monte from appellant Hung-Chih Yang. The parties signed a written lease. Under the lease, Yang, the landlord, was responsible for making “[a]ny alterations required by Law,” except those that were “a result of Tenant’s use.” According to the lease, the property had recently passed “final inspection.” Shortly after Vu took possession of the property, city officials declared that the property did not comport with the city’s zoning code and that Vu could not occupy it. Vu left the premises, and Vu and Yang sued each other. A bench trial followed. The trial court found that the property’s zoning issues predated the lease, meaning that they were inherent to the property itself and not a result of Vu’s use of the property. It found that bringing the building into compliance with the city’s rules was Yang’s responsibility. It found that the property had not passed final inspection. It thus found Yang had breached the lease. It also found for Vu on other claims, including negligent misrepresentation. Yang contends on appeal that the trial court erred by: (a) misinterpreting the El Monte Municipal Code; (b) not…