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
769 charsHere the words of the statute are clear and unambiguous: a tenant is entitled to a reduction of rent only upon a showing of a substantial breach of the warranty of habitability or of Civil Code section 1941. As previously stated, the evidence was undisputed that the premises were not properly waterproofed from the outside elements, that the roof leaked to the extent that the rain damaged the inside walls of the property, that the windows were not waterproofed, that portions of the wall were visible in the bathroom, and that the thermostat was inoperative. These conditions are clearly visible in the photographs entered into evidence at the trial. Furthermore, these conditions are not merely cosmetic or aesthetic, but affect the health and safety of the tenant.