Fernandes v. Singh (2017)

Citation: Fernandes v. Singh (2017)
Parent Document: Fernandes v. Singh (2017)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2017-11-02
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4440239/fernandes-v-singh/ ↗

Full Text

799 chars

8  Singh also argues that because the trial court imposed statutory penalties it could not
award punitive damages under Civil Code section 3294. But Civil Code section 1942.5,
subdivision (h), provides that statutory penalties are “in addition to any other remedies”
provided by law. Singh’s reliance on Cyrus v. Haveson (1976) 65 Cal.App.3d 306 is also
unhelpful. That case held malice was not well-pled, and also addressed a forcible entry
claim for which statutory damages were then capped at three times actual damages. (Id.
at pp. 316-317.) In this case Fernandes pleaded and proved malice, and several torts not
subject to that damages cap. (See e.g., id. at p. 316 [conversion]; Spinks v. Equity
Residential Briarwood Apartments (2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 1004, 1055-1056 [retaliatory
eviction].)

Other Sections in This Document (44)

Full Text