Aljabban v. Fontana Indoor Swap Meet, Inc. (2020)

Citation: Aljabban v. Fontana Indoor Swap Meet, Inc. (2020)
Parent Document: Aljabban v. Fontana Indoor Swap Meet, Inc. (2020)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2020-09-10
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4784084/aljabban-v-fontana-indoor-swap-... ↗

Full Text

951 chars

22
Cal.App.4th 1159, 1165 (Winet).) As Shapiro testified, there are many types
of vendors at the Swap Meet who install different types of fixtures, both when
moving into their spaces and while they are doing business, making it
impractical to list every possible type of permanent fixture in paragraph 4 of
the vendor’s permit. Walls, flooring and security gates are fixtures that every
vendor would be expected to have in their space, but specific types of
businesses might have other fixtures unique to their operations. A beauty
salon requires sinks and a water heater; a clothing store does not. Therefore,
we conclude that it is at least ambiguous whether the vendor permit intended
“walls, flooring, and security gates” as an exhaustive list of the permanent
fixtures subject to paragraph 4.
      “[P]arol evidence is properly admitted to construe a written instrument
when its language is ambiguous.” (Winet, supra, 4 Cal.App.4th at p. 1165.)

Other Sections in This Document (85)

Full Text