Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Citation
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Parent Document
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 2002-01-31
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2246961/hyatt-v-tedesco/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (28)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
- Hyatt v. Tedesco, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (2002)
Full Text
690 charsOn September 25, 2000, appellant filed her answer to the complaint. In her answer, appellant, among other things not germane to this appeal, denied the monthly rent amount as stated in the complaint, the amount of rent that was due and owing, and set forth the affirmative defense of breach of warranty of habitability. Appellant specifically alleged that the following conditions existed in the premises: leaking roof, missing bathtub tiles, windows not secure from the elements due to rotten frames, holes in the carpeting, cracks in the walls, security bars without release latches, water damage throughout the house to the walls and carpets, and plumbing that does not adequately drain.