5
also identified the Transient Occupancy Tax Permit as the only license or permit she needed to
operate the Airbnb. Defendant declared the premises were rented as a one bedroom with a loft,
she did not modify the premises, and she did not supply the ladder for access to the loft.
Triable issues of fact
In her declaration, defendant also identified the following facts as the triable issues
concerning the Airbnb: (1) the nature of the occupancy by the Airbnb persons; (2) the approval
of such use; (3) the circumstances under which the premises might be restricted from such use;
and (4) the waiver and estoppel caused by the express approval given by plaintiff’s predecessor
in interest with respect to the use of the premises as an Airbnb. Defendant also identified the
triable issues concerning the loft/attic as follows: (1) whether the use was illegal; and (2) her
lack of knowledge concerning the illegality when she moved in.
Plaintiff’s Reply to Defendant’s Opposition
Plaintiff’s reply was not supported by a declaration. Nevertheless, plaintiff raised the
following points in response to defendant’s opposition: (1) defendant’s failure to file a separate
statement of disputed facts meant there were no disputed facts;5 (2) the previous owner was
deceased; (3) the MSJ/SA was procedurally sound and defendant failed to explain how the
motion violated the rule and statute she cited; (4) the MSJ/SA does not seek to prove a different
cause of action; (5) the parties to a lease cannot modify it so as to allow an illegal use; (6) the
Transient Occupancy Tax permit is not a license or permit to operate an Airbnb; (7) plaintiff is
not required to pay relocation benefits; and (8) an MSJ/SA is statutorily required to be supported
by declarations, depositions and other identified evidence.
Plaintiff’s Objections to Defendant’s Evidence and Declaration
Concurrently with her reply, plaintiff filed evidentiary objections to defendant’s
declaration and exhibits. Plaintiff objected to defendant’s declaration in its entirety on the