Elmassian v. Flores (2021)

Citation: Elmassian v. Flores (2021)
Parent Document: Elmassian v. Flores (2021)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2021-09-27
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5291317/elmassian-v-flores/ ↗

Full Text

2,162 chars

22
       Although an inference could be drawn that the “many fights” Singleton saw referred to
fights defendant and other people had engaged in other than between Oscar and defendant, in
context, it did not preclude an inference that Singleton believed defendant and Oscar caused
problems because defendant was continually getting into fights and “scuffles” with Oscar.
Further, it could reasonably be inferred from the testimony about Singleton telling management
on April 26 and April 29 defendant was “back with her abuser,” that Singleton had complained
about defendant being abused by Oscar previous to these two dates. In reviewing the granting
of a directed verdict, we are required to accept the reasonable inferences which can be drawn
from the evidence that support the applicability of the defense. (See Hauter v. Zogarts, supra,
14 Cal.3d at p. 110.)
       Plaintiff used evidence of domestic violence to show Singleton was in fear of Oscar.18
Defense counsel went further, eliciting domestic violence evidence in cross-examining
Singleton to try to show she was threatened and harassed by Oscar’s acts of domestic violence
committed on the property. The evidence supported the defense that, to the extent the three-day
notice nuisance grounds were based on defendant and Oscar’s loud and disruptive fights and
other domestic violence incidents, the notice could not support the eviction under section
1161.3.
       Singleton testified on cross-examination that, although she believed Oscar was a gang
member, she did not see him commit any gang-related crime. Singleton’s fear and the
interference with the enjoyment of her property sharply escalated and “got bad” in the months
of April and May, coinciding with when defendant broke up with Oscar, and defendant was
continually victimized by Oscar’s violent behavior at the apartment complex. Living very close
to defendant’s unit, Singleton could “overhear the violence that goes on,” and she feared Oscar
was a violent person, “based on the way he abuses [defendant].” She saw holes in the wall by
defendant’s apartment door caused by “Oscar and [defendant] when they get in a scuffle [sic].”

Other Sections in This Document (74)

Full Text