Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: General yet crucial questions

All of the previous advice is good. Remember that a party can 'sue' (i.e. file a lawsuit) for almost anything, and the other side will have to defend or risk a default judgment. Defending any suit, even one without merit, is a hassle and an expense.

Beyond that, the question becomes, if or when a lawsuit over one or more of the subjects you asked about is filed and served, what are the plaintiff's chances of winning? In order to win a properly-defended suit, the plaintiff will need to have both the law and the facts on his side. A lot of times plaintiffs lose lawsuits they might have otherwise won because their evidence was weak, or not well presented.

A final factor to consider is the economics of a proposed or threatened lawsuit. Even where you might theoretically win, it is not economic to sue where your money judgment would be small in relation to the costs of suit. This is true for most cases of slander involving ordinary folks. Further, judgments are often hard to enforce (collect).

An unemployed person's loss of prospective income due to disconnection of a phone where he might have received job offers is probably too speculative for an award of money damages. It would require very strong evidence of a specific offer from a specific employer and that there was no other way for the employer to contact the job seeker.

Re: General yet crucial questions

You sublet from the lessor. You then gave them some money that you apparently owed the lessor, who returned it to you, and is now suing to get it back. They apparently are owed the money and now want it. The lessor is obviously not very bright. But why don't you jst give them the money you apparently owe them? Pay them the money by cash but demand a receipt or by check. then go to the court appearance for the trial and make sure the matter is taken off calender. If the lessor wants to inspect the property, and that's not in your written sublease with the lessor. Then I don't see any reason why you have to show it to the lessor. However, if you took some sort of an assignment of the original lease the inspection clause may be in that written agrement. Forget the police report on your attempt to subsublet. This isn't a crime. And it isn't actionable for slander because it was true. How in the hell can you sue for lost wages when you're apparently unemployed? If you were employed you could sue for lost wages. However, you'd probably not win unless you got a judge that didn't know the law, and that's possible.

Re: General yet crucial questions

First of all, is this a commercial lease, or residential lease? Makes a difference.

They could be liable for abuse of process, if you can prove that you gave them the money, and they returned it, only to sue later.

Whether they can demand entry with 24 hour notice depends on what the lease or sublease says.

Regarding the police report, it is probably not slander, but perhaps intentional infliction of emotional distress.

There are a lot of depends on counter suit. You may be able to claim this is cost of defending.

How can they disconnect your long distance and your voice mail? If you prove they can, they may have some liability, more for punitive damages, but you need to remember, for every argument, there is a counter argument. What is their side of the story?

Re: General yet crucial questions

The answer to the first question is yes (you are probably referring to an attempt to get a landlord to accept rent offered to him AFTER a 3 day period set out in a notice had already expired). The answer to the second question is also yes; a landlord need only give reasonable notice prior to conducting an inspection, and 24 hours is considered reasonable. The answer to the third question is no, not if the report is true (then it is not "slander", which requires that the report be false). The answer to the last question is "no"; by the same token,the lessor cannot expect to be compensated for his lost time in being required to go to court