Case Name: Pirouzkar v. G&K Management Company, Inc., et al.

Case No.: 1-13-CV-258075

Defendant G&K Management Company, Inc. (“Defendant”) demurs to the second amended complaint (“SAC”) filed by plaintiff Peter Pirouzkar (“Plaintiff”).

Plaintiff is a resident in an apartment complex known as San JoseGardens, located at 4668 Albany Drive in San Jose.  (SAC at ¶¶ 12, 13.)  At all relevant times, San JoseGardens has been managed by Defendant and Plaintiff has been provided with Section 8 housing assistance from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.  (Id. at ¶ 14.)  Plaintiff alleges that his rent has been miscalculated for years due to a failure to include various medical costs and charges that he incurs each year, resulting in him having to pay more rent than legally obligated.  (Id. at ¶ 21, 22.)  Plaintiff further alleges that he has not been provided with adequate accommodations for his disability; this allegation is predicated on, among other things, Defendant’s purported failure to take into account how his disabilities created communication difficulties, its failure to accommodate Plaintiff’s request not to post notices on his door and its failure to respond to his request to remove cars parked in his allocated parking spot.  (Id. at ¶ 30.)

On May 13, 2014, Plaintiff filed the SAC asserting claims for: (1) breach of contract; (2) retaliation (Civil Code § 1942.5); (3) intentional infliction of emotional distress; (4) violation of Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civil Code § 51 et seq.); (5) violation of Civil Code § 54.1; (6) breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment; (7) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing; and (8) negligence.

On June 20, 2014, Defendant filed the instant demurrer to the fourth and fifth causes of action on the ground of failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).)

Defendant asserts that Plaintiff’s fourth and fifth causes of action are deficient because they have not been pleaded with the requisite specificity, including facts setting forth how Plaintiff’s rent was miscalculated, identification all of his alleged disabilities and articulation all of the exact occasions when he was retaliated against.

The Unruh Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on certain protected categories and guarantees full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, and services in all business establishments.  (Civ. Code, § 51, subd. (b).)  This prohibition includes discrimination based on an individual’s disability.

The general rule is that statutory claims must be pleaded with particularity.  (See Covenant Case, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4^th 771, 790.)  Further, California law requires that a plaintiff’s complaint contain “statement of the facts constituting the cause of action, in ordinary and concise language”- i.e., the complaint must allege “ultimate facts” rather than mere conclusions of law.  Here, despite Defendant’s protestations to the contrary, Plaintiff has pleaded his claims with the requisite specificity, including identifying the particular disabilities that he suffers from.  (See SAC at ¶ 28.)  Additional information sought by Defendant, such as how Plaintiff’s rent was miscalculated, can be obtained through the discovery process.

Accordingly, Defendant’s demurrer to the fourth and fifth causes of action on the ground of failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action is OVERRULED.