Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Chacon v. Litke, 181 Cal. App. 4th 1234 (2010)

Citation
Chacon v. Litke, 181 Cal. App. 4th 1234 (2010)
Parent Document
Chacon v. Litke, 181 Cal. App. 4th 1234 (2010)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2010-01-19

Other Sections in This Document (180)

Full Text

781 chars
clarified that the conduct underlying the Twelfth and Sixteenth affirmative defenses was Litke’s compliance with the Ordinance by bringing the successful unlawful detainer action and the Chacons’ refusal to vacate upon receiving the lawful 60-day notice. The Seventeenth affirmative defense of res judicata and collateral estoppel was based on the asserted preclusive effect of the unlawful detainer judgment. On August 17, 2007, the trial court (Hon. Peter Busch) granted the Chacons’ motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the three challenged affirmative defenses, finding they failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a defense, and the court ordered judgment entered for the Chacons and against Litke on those affirmative defenses. Trial and Judgment for the Chacons