Ruling In Public Housing Mass Eviction Case Is Under Submission

Ruling In Public Housing Mass Eviction Case Is Under Submission

By Lynda Carson September 15, 2006

On Friday September 15, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Winifred Smith was expected to make a ruling that would have thrown out most of the allegations being used by the Oakland Housing Authority (OHA) in a case of mass eviction in East Oakland.

Instead, Judge Smith postponed her ruling and placed it under submission.

During April of 2006, the OHA originally alleged that 34 families were Unlawful Occupants (squatters) at Lockwood Gardens public housing complex in Oakland, and the OHA has been desperately trying to find a reason to evict them ever since. (See Judge Smith's Tentative Ruling at the bottom of this page to see her perspective on what the OHA is trying to do.)

In a surprise to court-watchers and housing activists keeping a close eye on the mass evictions taking place in Oakland's public housing units, Judge Smith postponed her tentative ruling this morning, accepted the latest arguments from both sides of the case and took them under submission. Judge Smith is now expected to make a ruling on the case with-in a few days, which may or may not differ from her tentative ruling that was postponed earlier today.

Courtroom observers believed that the attorneys' representing the Oakland Housing Authority were brutal in their tactics to strong arm the judge into ruling against the families facing eviction at Lockwood Gardens. "I think that Judge Smith was dishonered by the attorney's for the Oakland Housing Authority," attorney Bob Salinas said.

Regardless of todays outcome, attorney Marc Janowitz said, "I believe the judge will sustain the tentative ruling."

The mass eviction case that originally involved 34 families or more at Lockwood Gardens have all been consolidated, and today's ruling would have affected around 20 families or more. "There were more tenants evicted than were represented, and there were upwards of 20 families represented in court today, but I believe that more than 30 families were actually evicted by the OHA at Lockwood Gardens," said attorney Jorge Aguilar.

The whole case of mass eviction at Lockwood Gardens stems from corruption that was taking place with-in the OHA's East District Office during the past year.

During early July, 2006 a 46 year old former Oakland Housing Authority clerk named Carolyn Wilson was arrested and charged with 64 felony fraud charges and one felony charge of misaproppriating funds while working at the OHA's East District office in Oakland. Wilson was accused of demanding unlawful cash payments from the 34 families that were facing eviction at Lockwood Gardens, and is still sitting in St. Tammany Parish Jail, fighting extradition back to Oakland California.

Despite the fact that the Housing Authority clerk is the one being charged by the DA.'s office with 64 felony counts or more, while the families facing eviction at Lockwood Gardens have not been charged with anything by the DA's office, the Oakland Housing Authority believes that the families they are trying to evict are in some manner responsible for the criminal activities of their own employee, who now sits in jail in Louisiana.

During April of 2006, OHA spokesperson David Lipsetz said, "The OHA has served eviction notices to 34 families at Lockwood Gardens because none of the families applied for, or got onto the waiting list to move into their public housing units," said Lipsetz. "The tenants worked with a former clerk to gain access to the units. The OHA does not have any files on the families, and the OHA does not believe that any of the families signed a lease before moving into those units. Forcible detainers are standard procedure for those that have illegally moved into the OHA's public housing units."

The tenants claimed otherwise and hired some attorneys' to defend themselves from the accusations of the OHA. When the facts of the case were revealed in court, it turned out that the families facing eviction had indeed all signed leases before moving into their housing units and the OHA had been accepting their rents for many months before the mass eviction case landed in the courts.

For more on why the tenants are defending themselves from mass eviction at Lockwood Gardens, click onto the stories below...


Oakland Public Housing Tenants Exonerated
by Lynda Carson Saturday, Jul. 15, 2006 at 5:35 PM
tenantsrule [at] yahoo.com

[Former Oakland Housing Authority Employee Declares That Tenants Facing Eviction At Lockwood Gardens Are Innocent!]

By Lynda Carson July 14, 2006
A case of fraud and corruption in the Oakland Housing Authority (OHA) took a new turn during the week of July 10, after Carolyn Wilson a former employee of the OHA who was arrested on July 6, and charged with 65 felony counts, declared that the 34 families facing eviction at Oakland's Lockwood Gardens were not aware of any wrong doing or irregularities while moving into their housing units.

Click below for full story...

http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2006/07/20824.php

^^^^^^^^^^^
Poor Tenants Deceived by Oakland Housing Official Now
Face the Nightmare of Mass Eviction

by Lynda Carson May 2006

Due to an Oakland housing official's acts of fraud, 34
poor families face eviction from Lockwood Gardens, by
order of the Oakland Housing Authority. Lydia Gans
photo

Fear and panic have set in at some of East Oakland's
public housing units, as police agents from the
Oakland Housing Authority have been making late-night
visits to tenants, and demanding that the families
pack up and move within a five-day period.

Click below for full story...

http://www.thestreetspirit.org/Mayreal2006/evictions.htm

Take a look below for a peek at the huge battle that has been taking place in the courts to defend the families from mass eviction at Lockwood Gardens. The 20 cases or more have been consolidated, and the 3 cases below are the ones listed in todays Alameda County Court Calendar.

The tenants defense team includes Oakland Attorney Bob Salinas, the Eviction Defense Center, and the East Bay Community Law Center.

The Oakland Housing Authority has Goldfarb and Lipman representing them.

See the trail of legal actions below and the Tentative Ruling of Judge Winifred Smith at the very bottom that was expected to be ruled upon today, but was placed under submission for a few more days while she makes a final decision.


Title: Oakland Housing Authority VS Turner
Case Type: Civil
Complaint Type: Unlawful Detainer
Case Subtype: General Civil
Filing Date: 03/23/06
Filing Location: Wiley W. Manuel Courthouse

---Parties Involved---
Eviction Filed on 03/23/06 - Complaint Unlawful Detainer
Plaintiff Oakland Housing Authority - Attorney: Evje II, Arnold W.
Defendant Ira L Turner - Attorney: Aguilar II, Jorge

---Attorney's Involved---
Attorney Name : Aguilar II, Jorge
Representing : Turner
Firm Name : Eviction Defense Center
Address : 1611 Telegraph AV Suite 726
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone : (510) 452-4541
Fax : (510) 452-4875
Email Address : N/A

Attorney Name : Evje II, Arnold W.
Representing : Oakland Housing Authority
Firm Name :
Address : 950 Oak Street
San Francisco, CA 94117
Phone : (415) 861-6070
Fax : (415) 861-6073
Email Address : N/A

---Register of Actions---
03/23/06 Complaint Unlawful Detainer Filed
03/23/06 Summons on Complaint Issued and Filed
03/23/06 Rejection Letter Issued on Civil Case Cover Sheet
03/24/06 Notice of Delayed Access to UD Case Issued
04/06/06 Civil Case Cover Sheet Filed for Oakland Housing Authority
04/11/06 Application Re: Posting Summons and Complaint Filed for Oakland Housing Authority
04/12/06 Application Re: Posting Summons and Complaint Granted
04/24/06 Application Re: Waiver of Court Fees and Costs Filed for Turner
04/24/06 Application Re: Waiver of Court Fees and Costs As to Ira L Turner Granted
04/24/06 Demurrer to Complaint Filed by Turner
04/24/06 Demurrer to Complaint Hearing Confirmed for 05/25/2006 09:00 AM D- 31
05/02/06 Association of Attorneys Filed
05/02/06 Declaration in Reply Filed by Turner
05/05/06 Objection to Deft.'s Request for Judicial Notice Nos. 3 and 4 Filed
05/05/06 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Demurrer to Complaint Filed
05/10/06 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Reply Filed
05/22/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Filed:
05/23/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
05/25/06 Civil Law and Motion Hearing Commenced and Completed
05/25/06 Demurrer to Complaint - Dropped
06/02/06 First Amended Complaint Filed
06/02/06 Summons Issued and Filed
06/19/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Filed:
06/22/06 Civil OSC - Complaints 07/24/2006 09:00 AM D- 136
06/27/06 Other Exparte Reservation Set for dept: 31 date: 06/29/2006 time: 08:45 AM
06/28/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
06/28/06 Civil Ex-Parte Hearing Dropped from dept: 31 date: 06/29/2006 time: 08:45 AM
06/29/06 Second Amended Complaint Filed
07/24/06 Civil OSC - Complaints Commenced and Continued
07/24/06 Hearing Continued to Civil OSC - Complaints dept: 136 date: 10/16/2006 time: 09:00 AM
07/31/06 Demurrer to Complaint Filed by Turner
07/31/06 Demurrer to Complaint Hearing Confirmed for 09/15/2006 09:00 AM D- 31
09/01/06 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition Filed
09/11/06 Declaration in Reply Filed by Turner
09/15/06 Civil Law and Motion Hearing Commenced and Completed
09/15/06 Demurrer to Complaint Taken Under Submission

--Rulings and CMC Actions---
09/15/06 Demurrer to Complaint Taken Under Submission
06/28/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
05/25/06 Demurrer to Complaint - Dropped
05/23/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
04/24/06 Application Re: Waiver of Court Fees and Costs As to Turner Granted
04/12/06 Application Re: Posting Summons and Complaint Granted

**********
---General Information---
Title: Housing Authority of the City of Oakland VS Carr
Case Type: Civil
Complaint Type: Unlawful Detainer
Case Subtype: General Civil
Filing Date: 03/23/06
Filing Location: Wiley W. Manuel Courthouse

---Parties---
03/23/06 Complaint Unlawful Detainer
Plaintiff Housing Authority of the City of Oakland/ Attorney Evje II, Arnold W.
Defendant Carr /Attorney Aguilar II, Jorge

---Register of Actions---
03/23/06 Complaint Unlawful Detainer Filed
03/23/06 Civil Case Cover Sheet Filed for Housing Authority of the City of Oakland
03/23/06 Summons on Complaint Issued and Filed
03/27/06 Notice of Delayed Access to UD Case Issued
04/03/06 Application Re: Waiver of Court Fees and Costs Filed for Carr
04/03/06 Demurrer to Complaint Filed by Carr
04/03/06 Demurrer to Complaint Hearing Confirmed for 05/01/2006 02:00 PM D- 31
04/04/06 Application Re: Waiver of Court Fees and Costs As to Stacey Melina Carr Granted
04/17/06 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition Filed
04/20/06 Declaration Re: Peremptory Challenge Filed for Housing Authority of the City of Oakland
04/21/06 Declaration in Reply Filed by Carr
04/25/06 Proposed Order Filed for Housing Authority of the City of Oakland
05/01/06 Civil Law and Motion Hearing Commenced and Completed
05/01/06 Demurrer Sustained With Leave to Amend
05/02/06 Association of Attorneys Filed
05/02/06 Declaration in Reply Filed by Carr
05/05/06 Motion for Sanctions Filed for Defendant
05/05/06 Motion for Sanctions Hearing Confirmed for 06/07/2006 09:00 AM D- 31
05/08/06 Order restoring demurrer to calendar Filed
05/08/06 Demurrer to Complaint Filed by Carr
05/08/06 Demurrer to Complaint 05/12/2006 09:00 AM D- 31
05/08/06 Declaration Re: Peremptory Challenge Granted
05/11/06 Letter from Received
05/12/06 Civil Law and Motion Hearing Commenced and Completed
05/12/06 Demurrer to Complaint Taken Under Submission
05/15/06 Demurrer Sustained With Leave to Amend
05/22/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Filed:
05/25/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
06/02/06 First Amended Complaint Filed
06/02/06 Summons Issued and Filed
06/02/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Continuance Filed for Housing Authority of the City of Oakland
06/07/06 Civil Law and Motion Hearing Commenced and Continued
06/07/06 Motion for Sanctions - Motion Rescheduled
06/07/06 Hearing Continued to Civil Law and Motion dept: 31 date: 07/07/2006 time: 09:00 AM
06/19/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Filed:
06/27/06 Other Exparte Reservation Set for dept: 31 date: 06/29/2006 time: 08:45 AM
06/28/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
06/28/06 Civil Ex-Parte Hearing Dropped from dept: 31 date: 06/29/2006 time: 08:45 AM
06/29/06 Second Amended Complaint Filed
07/05/06 Informal Correspondence to / from Robert Salinas Received
07/07/06 Civil Law and Motion Hearing Commenced and Completed
07/07/06 Motion for Sanctions - Dropped
07/31/06 Demurrer to Complaint Filed by Carr
07/31/06 Demurrer to Complaint Hearing Confirmed for 09/15/2006 09:00 AM D- 31
09/01/06 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition Filed
09/11/06 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Reply Filed
09/15/06 Civil Law and Motion Hearing Commenced and Completed
09/15/06 Demurrer to Complaint Taken Under Submission

---Rulings and CMC Actions---
09/15/06 Demurrer to Complaint Taken Under Submission
07/07/06 Motion for Sanctions - Dropped
06/28/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
06/07/06 Motion for Sanctions - Motion Rescheduled
05/25/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
05/15/06 Demurrer Sustained With Leave to Amend
05/12/06 Demurrer to Complaint Taken Under Submission
05/08/06 Declaration Re: Peremptory Challenge Granted
05/01/06 Demurrer Sustained With Leave to Amend
04/04/06 Application Re: Waiver of Court Fees and Costs As to Carr Granted


*************
---General Information---
Title: Oakland Housing Authority VS Wyatt
Case Type: Civil
Complaint Type: Unlawful Detainer
Case Subtype: General Civil
Filing Date: 03/23/06
Filing Location: Wiley W. Manuel Courthouse

---Parties---
03/23/06 Complaint Unlawful Detainer
Plaintiff Oakland Housing Authority/Attorney Evje II, Arnold W.
Defendant Wyatt/Attorney Aguilar II, Jorge

---Register of Actions---
03/23/06 Complaint Unlawful Detainer Filed
03/23/06 Summons on Complaint Issued and Filed
03/23/06 Notice of Administrative Transfer of Case Within County (Same Jurisdiction) to Wiley W. Manuel Court
03/24/06 Rejection Letter Issued on Civil Case Cover Sheet
03/27/06 Notice of Delayed Access to UD Case Issued
03/30/06 Application Re: Waiver of Court Fees and Costs Filed for Wyatt
03/30/06 Application Re: Waiver of Court Fees and Costs As to Wyatt Granted
03/30/06 Demurrer to Complaint Filed by Wyatt
03/30/06 Demurrer to Complaint Hearing Confirmed for 04/28/2006 02:00 PM D- 31
04/06/06 Civil Case Cover Sheet Filed for Oakland Housing Authority
04/17/06 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition Filed
04/20/06 Declaration Re: Peremptory Challenge Filed for Oakland Housing Authority
04/21/06 Declaration in Reply Filed by Wyatt
04/25/06 Proposed Order Filed for Oakland Housing Authority
04/28/06 Civil Law and Motion Hearing Commenced and Continued
04/28/06 Demurrer to Complaint - Motion Rescheduled
04/28/06 Hearing Continued to Civil Law and Motion dept: 31 date: 05/05/2006 time: 09:00 AM
05/02/06 Association of Attorneys Filed
05/02/06 Declaration in Reply Filed by Wyatt
05/05/06 Civil Law and Motion Hearing Commenced and Continued
05/05/06 Demurrer to Complaint - Motion Rescheduled
05/05/06 Hearing Continued to Civil Law and Motion dept: 31 date: 05/12/2006 time: 09:00 AM
05/08/06 Declaration Re: Peremptory Challenge Granted
05/11/06 Letter from Received
05/12/06 Civil Law and Motion Hearing Commenced and Completed
05/12/06 Demurrer to Complaint Taken Under Submission
05/15/06 Demurrer Sustained With Leave to Amend
05/17/06 Civil OSC - Complaints 06/19/2006 09:00 AM D- 136
05/22/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Filed:
05/25/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
06/02/06 First Amended Complaint Filed
06/02/06 Summons Issued and Filed
06/19/06 Civil OSC - Complaints Commenced and Continued
06/19/06 Hearing Continued to Civil OSC - Complaints dept: 136 date: 07/24/2006 time: 09:00 AM
06/19/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Filed:
06/27/06 Other Exparte Reservation Set for dept: 31 date: 06/29/2006 time: 08:45 AM
06/28/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
06/28/06 Civil Ex-Parte Hearing Dropped from dept: 31 date: 06/29/2006 time: 08:45 AM
06/29/06 Second Amended Complaint Filed
07/24/06 Civil OSC - Complaints Commenced and Continued
07/24/06 Hearing Continued to Civil OSC - Complaints dept: 136 date: 10/16/2006 time: 09:00 AM
07/31/06 Demurrer to Complaint Filed by Lagina B Wyatt
07/31/06 Demurrer to Complaint Hearing Confirmed for 09/15/2006 09:00 AM D- 31
09/01/06 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition Filed
09/06/06 Other Exparte Reservation Set for dept: 31 date: 09/07/2006 time: 01:30 PM
09/06/06 Civil Ex-Parte Hearing Dropped from dept: 31 date: 09/07/2006 time: 01:30 PM
09/11/06 Declaration in Reply Filed by Wyatt
09/15/06 Civil Law and Motion Hearing Commenced and Completed
09/15/06 Demurrer to Complaint Taken Under Submission

a---Rulings and CMC Orders---
09/15/06 Demurrer to Complaint Taken Under Submission
06/28/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
05/25/06 Stipulation and Order Re: Other Exparte Granted
05/15/06 Demurrer Sustained With Leave to Amend
05/12/06 Demurrer to Complaint Taken Under Submission
05/08/06 Declaration Re: Peremptory Challenge Granted
05/05/06 Demurrer to Complaint - Motion Rescheduled
04/28/06 Demurrer to Complaint - Motion Rescheduled
03/30/06 Application Re: Waiver of Court Fees and Costs As to aWyatt Granted

---Tentative Ruling That Was Expected To Be Ruled Upon On September 15, 2006 ---

This Tentative Ruling is issued by Judge Winifred Y. Smith: The Demurrer of Defendant Ira R. Turner to Second Amended Complaint is SUSTAINED as follows: 1. As to the Fourth Cause of Action to Quiet Title and for Rescission, the demurrer is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiff has adequately stated grounds for rescission of the lease, consistent with Civil Code § 1689. While Plaintiff's employee is the person alleged to have made the misrepresentations to procure the lease, it is also alleged that Defendant "knew and/or
should have known that they were obtaining possession of the Premises through Plaintiff's employee's actions that were not within the course and scope of said employee's employment and that said actions were without the authority, knowledge and consent of Plaintiff." (FAC 12(b).) The allegation that Defendant knew that Plaintiff's employee was acting without Plaintiff's authority and consent is sufficient, if proven, to show that Plaintiff's consent was given due to fraud and "with the connivance of" Defendant. (Civil Code §1689(b)(1).) However, the cause of action does not sufficiently state each of the elements of a quiet title action per CCP §761.020. Thus, the general demurrer is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND to permit Plaintiff to sufficiently allege each of the required elements under the statute. 2. As to the First Cause of Action for Forcible Detainer, the demurrer is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. Defendant entered the property under the terms of a lease and with the apparent consent of Plaintiff. Defendant is not alleged to have made any false representations to Plaintiff in connection with the entry onto the
property. Rather, Plaintiff's employee is alleged to have made misrepresentations to Plaintiff. (See FAC 6, 7, 12(a).) Such an entry does not meet the requirements for forcible detainer. (CCP §1160(2); Moldovan v. Fischer (1957) 149 Cal.App.2d 600, 609.) Even if the lease between the parties is determined not to be enforceable, that is not enough to establish that entry under that lease constitutes forcible detainer. (Cf. Carteri v. Roberts (1903) 140 Cal. 164, 167 [entry under a void lease does not constitute unlawful entry].) 3. As to the Third Cause of Action for Ejectment, the demurrer is likewise SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. The cause of action for ejectment is an action to regain possession of a rental unit, and must comply with Measure EE. Having failed to do so, leave to amend would appear to be futile. 4. On the Fifth Cause of Action for Trespass,
the demurrer is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. Lack of consent is an element of this cause of action. (CACI 2000; Church of Christ in Hollywood v. Sup. Ct. (2002) 99 Cal.App4th 1244, 1252; Civic Western Corp. v. Zila Industries, Inc. (1977) 66 Cal.App.3d 1, 16-17.) Because consent appears from the face of the complaint and the matters previously judicially noticed, it does not appear that Plaintiff can state a cause of action for trespass against Defendant. 5. On the Second Cause of Action for Declaratory Relief, the demurrer is OVERRULED. However, the Court notes that, given that the only cause of action potentially remaining appears to be one to quiet title and for rescission, declaratory relief appears to be redundant of the relief sought under that cause of action. The Court will prepare the order. Defendant shall file and serve notice of entry of order. Plaintiff shall have 10 days leave to amend as stated herein. Defendant shall 10 days thereafter to respond.