Ocean Park Associates v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 8 Cal. Rptr. 3d 421 (2004)

Citation: Ocean Park Associates v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 8 Cal. Rptr. 3d 421 (2004)
Parent Document: Ocean Park Associates v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 8 Cal. Rptr. 3d 421 (2004)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2004-01-07
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2295617/ocean-park-associates-v-santa-m... ↗

Full Text

1,054 chars

With respect to evidence to support the specific figures used for delay time or unreasonable lengthy construction time, the hearing officer stated that “[a]ll tenants who testified . . . asserted that the work took an unreasonably long time and was subject to unreasonable delays.” The hearing officer admitted that Harreschou “was planning to review the testimony of the owner’s contractors, including what was in the building before, the scope of work, the size of crews, the budget, and so forth, and then provide an opinion as to how long the entire job should reasonably have taken. However, the owners failed to present any testimony on the above subjects, nor did they submit any blueprints, plans, bids, contracts, permits or other documents which would have helped Mr. Harreschou reconstruct what work was done, how and by whom.” The hearing officer concluded that this lack of evidence “undermined the owners’ case” because “any doubts have to be resolved against them with respect to issues on which they failed to produce any evidence.” *1059

Other Sections in This Document (140)

Full Text