Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Citation
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Parent Document
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 2017-10-05
Other Sections in This Document (61)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
- Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
Full Text
1,138 charsIn this case, all five factors are present, even without considering all prior actions by the defendants. After Fernandes returned home from working a graveyard shift as a Denny's waitress-and without any prior notice due to the fraudulent proof of service-she found herself without a home or her necessary property, such as food and clothing. This caused her emotional distress, not merely economic harm. She struggled to keep her job after the fraudulent eviction and had to stay with friends, showing she could not financially absorb the blow defendants inflicted. The conduct was repeated, in *942that this was the third baseless attempt to evict Fernandes; it was no accident, but was part of a vicious campaign to stop her from seeking habitable housing. Defendants showed no remorse, inasmuch as they took no steps to remedy the substandard conditions, as reported by the subsequent tenants. (See Lopez v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc. (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 566, 592-593, 201 Cal.Rptr.3d 156 [proof of a pattern of misconduct would be relevant to show a defendant acted with willful and conscious disregard].)