4
(2) The MSJ sought to prove a “different case” than what was alleged in the complaint.
Specifically, defendant argued the complaint alleged three causes of action based on the failure
to pay rent, the failure to stop using the attic and the failure to stop operating an Airbnb.
According to defendant, there was “no notice to quit for nuisance or waste.”
(3) The lease was modified via an “Addendum” by the prior owner on November 5,
2009, to permit defendant to operate an Airbnb. Defendant attached the document to her
opposition as exhibit 1.
(4) Defendant’s use of the premises for an Airbnb is not illegal. Under this heading,
defendant asserted four separate arguments: (a) she cited LAMC section 151.09(A)(2)
concerning the right of a tenant to allow minor dependent children to reside in the premises;
(b) she argued she had not been cited for an illegal use; (c) she had a permit to collect the
Transient Occupancy Tax; and (d) the Bell Memorandum, which was submitted by plaintiff in
support of the MSJ/SA, constituted hearsay.
(5) Plaintiff could not evict defendant for using the premises leased to her since the
rental agreement with plaintiff’s predecessor in interest specifically included the “loft” as part of
the premises.
Defendant’s Declaration
Objections
In her declaration attached to her opposition, defendant objected to the Bell
Memorandum on the following grounds: hearsay, lack of personal knowledge, and relevance.
Defendant also objected to plaintiff’s use of her deposition transcript on the grounds it
constituted hearsay, had not been reviewed by her for accuracy, and was not signed.
Contents
Defendant identified exhibit 1 as the lease modification or “Addendum” she entered into
with the previous owner which allowed her to operate an Airbnb.4 In her declaration, defendant