Mobasser v LASC; Wolf & Associates RPI APP-151, items 10d and 13b(2)
DECLARATION OF AFSANEH MOBASSER WITH EXHIBITS
IN SUPPORT OF
PETITION FOR WRIT (Limited Civil Case)
I, Afsaneh Mobasser, declare:
1. I am permanently disabled, and am the
Petitioner and the tenant Defendant in the limited unlawful detainer action
entitled Wolf & Associates v. Afsaneh
Mobasser (LASC Case No.12U00223) now pending before Hon. Leslie E. Brown,
Department 6, in the Beverly Hills Courthouse.
In this unlawful detainer case, the judgment for possession in favor of
the landlord was entered on January 14, 2013. If called as a witness I could
and would testify to the following from my own personal knowledge.
2. On Monday, January 21, 2013, the
Sheriff posted an eviction notice on the door to my home, an apartment that I
have lived in for more than seventeen years. The “lock-out” date is stated to
be January 26, 2013. The apartment is rent-restricted by the City of Los
Angeles.
3. I have attached true and correct copies
of the following documents:
Exhibit 1 – Ex Parte Application for Stay of Execution of Judgment or For Order
Shortening Time [filed 1/18/13]
Exhibit 2 – Case Summary [partial]
Exhibit 3 -- Cover Page of Untimely Facsimile Service [filed
1/23/13]
Exhibit 4 – Opposition to Defendant Afsaneh Mobasser’s Ex
Parte Application for Stay
of Enforcement Pending Appeal
Exhibit 5 – Letters Read to the Court at today’s hearing on
motion
4. The
judgment after trial by court is based upon a Statement of Decision that found
I did not remove all of the plants on the balcony of my apartment within 72
hours of receiving a Notice to Cure. Although there is no prohibition in the
building against tenants maintaining plants, the Landlord claimed I created a
nuisance by ‘overwatering the plants.’ According to my attorney’s motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings, the 3 day notice was legally defective by creating a
remedy disproportionate to alleged violation – overwatering, which could, by
limiting watering, “cure”
any alleged breach. The trial court’s sustaining an action on such a notice is an issue I wish to raise on appeal, and believe that all the tenants in rent restricted housing that permits plants on balconies could be subject to defective evictions as a financial incentive for landlords like the Plaintiffs, Wolf & Associates.
any alleged breach. The trial court’s sustaining an action on such a notice is an issue I wish to raise on appeal, and believe that all the tenants in rent restricted housing that permits plants on balconies could be subject to defective evictions as a financial incentive for landlords like the Plaintiffs, Wolf & Associates.
5.
There is the trial court’s denial
of my constitutional right to jury trial, which is another issue I want to
raise on appeal, as I assert there was an improper denial under the
circumstances. My attorney admitted it was his mistake that jury fees were not
deposited or included in the fee waiver he had assumed did so. The denial of
relief from this mistake resulted in the improper denial of my constitutional
right, I submit.
Mobasser v LASC; Wolf & Associates RPI APP-151, items 10d and 13b(2)
DECLARATION OF AFSANEH MOBASSER WITH EXHIBITS
6. My attorney of record, Edward Sands,
Esq., has abandoned me right before the eviction without having either been
substituted by me or by permission by the trial court. In fact, although I
filed recent papers in my own name because he forced me to, the court has still
been sending him all notices and papers, acknowledging that he is still attorney
of record at this crucial time.
7. If I am evicted, I will suffer serious
physical and psychological damage according to the declarations of my medical
providers that I attached to the motion for stay. Also, if I am evicted before
my appeal can be decided, even if I succeed in any of my claims of reversible
error, I will have lost my home forever and the ‘right to appeal’ is made
meaningless.
8. On Friday, January 18, 2013, my
attorney was present in the courtroom with me for the hearing noticed by
telephone the day before. The Court, by Clerk, asked the parties to pick a
return date. Due to the urgency, I asked for the following Monday and was told
it was a court holiday, so I asked for the next court day, which was Tuesday,
January 22, 2013. The attorney representing the landlord, one of Mr. Brennan’s
associates, first agreed to return for hearing on Tuesday, January 22. When my
attorney Mr. Sands heard that we agreed for Tuesday, he came over to the Clerk
where the landlord’s attorney and I had informed the Clerk of the agreed date,
and Mr. Sands announced, “They have to have time to file an Opposition, it has
to be later.” The landlord’s attorney, at Mr. Sands’ cue, then said, “Oh, I
can’t appear on Tuesday, we’ll have to make it Thursday, January 24, 2013.” I
then asked that attorney for his card, Mr. Sands interrupted and said to the
attorney, “You’re not going to be here, Mr. Brennan will be coming to argue.”
The attorney withdrew his hand from his coat and said, “I don’t have any more
cards.” So my attorney, with the eviction deadline fast approaching, assisted
the landlord’s attorney in both delaying the hearing and for more time to
prepare a voluminous reply, after which he totally abandoned me. He advocated
for the opposition and violated Rule 3-700(A)(2) of the Rules of Professional
Conduct.
9. As we were listening to the Clerk tell
us the dates and times for the filing and service of the Opposition and my
Reply, the Clerk informed us that the Opposition by the landlord would have to
be filed and served by email to me no later than 1:30pm on Wednesday, January
23, the day before the hearing, and that my reply could be filed and served at
8:30am, Thursday, January 24, the morning of the scheduled hearing on my motion
for stay pending appeal.
Mobasser v LASC; Wolf & Associates RPI APP-151, items 10d and 13b(2)
DECLARATION OF AFSANEH MOBASSER WITH EXHIBITS
10. The landlord’s attorney asked me for my
email address for service and I spelled out my name/email address, which I saw
him write down correctly as I dictated it (afsaneh@rocketmail.com). When the
clerk asked, I agreed to be served by email, but the opposing refused to accept
any service from my side by email.
11. At approximately 1:40pm on Wednesday,
January 23, I check my email inbox and found nothing from Brennan’s office, so
I called and talked to Harrison, he said he will call me back. I then called
the Clerk in Department 6 and was informed that an Opposition had been filed
with a proof of service. I asked her to read to me how it was served, and she
said it showed that it was by email. Throughout the afternoon I repeatedly
called Brennan’s office and was told the message (I did not get the Opposition)
would be given to Mr. Brennan. Not until 6:00pm on the evening before the
morning hearing did the landlord’s attorney offer to “fax just the Opposition,
but not any of the Exhibits.” I told him I did not have a fax and why was I not
served via email all these many hours. He
said do you want it faxed or not? I said
I will borrow my neighbor’s fax and received only 15 pages of the Opposition,
five hours late. I sent it to my attorney for his review before he and I
appeared the next morning.
12. On the following day, Thursday, January
24, at 7:45am, my attorney Mr. Sands called me and said he was not coming to
court and that I should argue and tell the court about the failure to serve me
per the Court’s ruling. I asked him to come to represent me, and he refused,
knowing the eviction is scheduled for Saturday.
13. I went to court, was by myself, and Mr.
Brennan approached me and handed me a huge stack of papers, which was the
Opposition with multiple exhibits that I had not received as ordered. Mr.
Brennan claimed there was no court order for service to me! I called Mr. Sands
and asked him to come to court but he said that he had heard from a second
source that Judge Brown was furious with him for having filed the motion to
disqualify judge Brown under my name, that Judge Brown believed he was the
puppeteer, not having the guts to file the motion to disqualify himself, and he
would be a red flag for the bull if he came to court. I asked the Clerk to see
the Proof of Service that Margaret, a substitute clerk, had told me the day
before said I was served via email. I told the clerk, Pat, I want to see the
Proof of Service to see who swore the service was completed to me by 1:30pm
through my email because it was not done, and believe that Mr. Brennan took a
deliberate step to prejudice me and my attorney’s ability to write a reply to
such a voluminous opposition. Mr. Brennan later claimed there was no order
requiring him to serve me by 1:30pm even though that was the deadline for
filing the opposition and the opposing attorney took down my email in front of
two of Judge Brown’s clerks.
Mobasser v LASC; Wolf & Associates RPI APP-151, items 10d and 13b(2)
DECLARATION OF AFSANEH MOBASSER WITH EXHIBITS
14. When the Court called the case on Thursday, I told the Court
about the landlord’s attorney’s violation of the briefing schedule and asked
the Court to ignore the Opposition, particularly because there should be some
sanction to the landlord who had submitted an untrue sworn Proof of Service.
The Court said that it had read the Opposition and would give me until 3pm to
prepare my reply (It was already 11am) and that would be the same amount of
time given before, to which I replied that that would not be the same amount of
time and ultimately the court gave until 8:30 the next morning. Immediately as
I left the court, I called and asked Mr. Sands to prepare the reply to
opposition and serve it when we appeared to argue the motion Friday morning. He
refused. I sent him an email reminding him he could not stop representing me
with such a deadline and without the Court’s permission because I still
considered him my attorney, as did the Court by continuing to send all notices
to him, not me. I also spoke by telephone with Mr. Sands three times on Thursday,
pleading with him to prepare the reply and appear and argue the motion for stay
because he was the one who advised me to file it and appeared with me to argue
it when it was filed last Friday as an ex parte, but then abandoned me on
Thursday and did not appear with me Friday morning. Pursuant
to the provisions of C.C.P. 284, an
attorney may be relieved from further representing the client either: (1) on
the consent of both the client and the attorney, filed with the clerk or
entered in the minutes; or (2) on order following noticed motion to the court
for leave to withdraw. (Also see Rule 376, California
Rules of Court.)
Neither has occurred, and the
Court is still serving all notices to my attorney, and he appeared with me last
Friday to present the motion for stay pending appeal.
15. There is no court reporter, so I am
describing what occurred today at the hearing of my motion for a stay. This
morning, when the Court called my case, Judge Brown said, “I did not get any
reply from you.” I told the Court that my attorney had abandoned me and I asked
the Court for a stay to either order Mr. Sands to represent me or to find
another attorney. The Court then said, “This has gone on too long and the
landlord wants the apartment,” and refused to grant a stay for me to get
presentation. I told the court that I am
in disbelief that the court’s only concern is to rush the eviction and be
mindful of landlord’s time and not give me an extra day to get an attorney when
several of my doctors had declared that the fragile state of my mental and
physical health would not survive an eviction and that I had observed other
evicted tenant’s apartments take weeks to be renovated to be rented out, at
which point the court got off the bench and took a few steps towards the chambers
until I stopped talking and then came back.
Mobasser v LASC; Wolf & Associates RPI APP-151, items 10d and 13b(2)
DECLARATION OF AFSANEH MOBASSER WITH EXHIBITS
16. The Court then held up the proof of
service from the appellate court’s denial of my writ, case number BS1413157 and
declared its displeasure no matter what my excuse for filing it.
I told the court that there has been a pattern
of harassment for many years, for example, for 5 or 6 weeks, the ceiling over
my living room was leaking water and each time I approached the management to
please fix it, Ms. Rubaum would shout angrily and loudly MOVE, MOVE, MOVE,
until the whole ceiling and a flood of water came down on my head (I already
had a serious head injury caused when a construction truck hit me while
crossing the street, I was thrown 8 feet up in the air and hit the ground with
my head) and only then I called LAHD ( A pervious manage on the very last day
she left told me about LAHD and that is how tenants finally got the management
to fix their needed repairs. When
tenants ask Ms. Rubaum for repairs, she tells them to move if they don’t like
it.) The then manager told me that the
eviction was retaliation because Ms. Rubaum believed I had called LAHD to
inspect the whole building. I had not.
I told the court
that all the plaintiff’s claims were false and fabrications and I would like to respond to as many as the
lies in the opposition, stated as facts, as the Court would allow, but the
court said that it had already heard the case and would not allow me. I said
that I only wish to point out a few of the obvious lies presented as facts in
the opposition and read from the transcript of Ms. Daly where in two place she
said that she did not believe the one broken ceramic pot that she had found
after a wind storm had come from above, that is my apartment from my apartment.
Page 11 lines 19 and 20
but
I don't know that it was from that
10:20:24 20 apartment.
Page 36 lines 10 to 12
I don't think it -- frankly, I don't
10:45:41 12 think it came from above.
10:45:42
13 Q. Okay.
Whereas, in the three day notice signed by plaintiff
herself she had declared,
“flower
pots that have on several occasions
dropped from the railing and smashed on
the concrete below."
And even though, as your honor
knows, plaintiff admitted on the stand that there was not but one pot that had
been found broken on the backyard, still in the opposition as a matter fact
plaintiff still claimed that several pots had fallen on Ms. Daly’s head! That
they turned the one plant that was one of the several that belonged to the
building and had fallen off the raised wall surrounding the small garden by
wind, into an excuse to evict me and manipulate the
court. As I wanted to give another
example I was interrupted and stopped by the Court many times. The Court said,
“if you talk, I’m going to leave” and would get up from his chair and then when
I stopped, he would sit down. The Court
said, “I’m here about 1176.” I responded that I should have the opportunity to
address what I described as all the lies and fabrications that were presented
in the Opposition to my 1176 motion stated as facts. Mr. Brennan, the
landlord’s attorney, said that I was supposed to file the reply today and that
I had time to do so. I told the Court that I relied on my attorney to do so,
that I am not well, and even if I were, I am not an attorney. I argued that I
showed extreme hardship by presenting to court 5 medical doctors, a physical
therapist and a psychologist who have submitted declarations. I pointed out
that Dr. Nikzad said that I am unable to move; not that it is difficult, not
that it is inconvenient, I cannot move, and
Mobasser v LASC; Wolf & Associates RPI APP-151, items 10d and 13b(2)
DECLARATION OF AFSANEH MOBASSER WITH EXHIBITS
Dr. Goodarzi believes that I will
have a heart attack if evicted because my heart rate beat is twice its normal
rate and I have not been taking my medication as I was before and I have gained
18lbs in a short period of time recently while I am already obese. I said that
none of these doctors are related to me as Mr. Brennan stated in the
Opposition, and were all referred through Medicare because they take Medicare
and are in the area, but for Dr. Goodarzi, who took over as the head of the department
after Dr. Ricardo Aziz left Cedars Sinai to become the head of a hospital in
another state, and I do not pay any of them directly so I am not influencing
them inappropriately besides my files are available to court. And I said that the plaintiff would present
to court such an unsubstantiated and wild accusation is another indication of
all the hearsay and lies presented to court as facts. Having established extreme hardship, I showed
there is no irreparable harm because I can pay all the rent and will remove all
the plants today. I said, “Every single accusation of the Opposition is
patently false. All fabrications and
hearsay. I am not re-trying the case. I just want to prove to the court that
they are lying. I gave the example that on page 3 of the Opposition, line 9, it
is written that plants fell on my neighbor Ms. Daly’s head and then referred to
the Deposition of Ms. Daly where she testified that she heard a noise at four
in morning and the next morning she saw one plant on the ground with a broken
pot and that it was not from my
balcony. I said, “Your honor knows that in the plaintiff’s testimony she
admitted only one plant had fallen but she wrote that a number of plants had
fallen (in the 3 day notice).” This was only one example of the exaggerated
falsehoods in the Opposition that I wished to and could disprove. That your honor knows that Mrs. Rubaum
admitted that there were no several plants that had fallen and crashed as my
attorney questioned why she put several when there was only one ever found
broken on the ground, not being able to say I wrote that to manipulate the
court, Ms. Rubaum said oh, I just wrote it that way, giving no explanation why
she would. I then said your honor the
only the plaintiff and her witnesses were proven to have presented false
testimony to the court.
17. At this time the court told me that I am
intelligent. I thanked the court and the
court said that he was not giving me a compliment just saying I am intelligent.
Then I read from Rosalie Rubaum’s declaration,
page 3, line 8, that’ “On one occasion, Ms. Mobasser was eating potato chips
while waiting for the elevator. When another tenant (an elderly woman) said the
chips looked good, Ms. Mobasser took the chips from her bag and began shoving
them into the woman’s mouth.” I asked
the court what is this woman’s name? When did this happen? The building has
security camera’s which record the entrance to the elevator ever since we moved
to the building, where is the recording of this? I know I would keep such a
recording if it existed. Where is the proof?
Where is the police report? Where
is the restraining order? Why was I allowed to live in the building for all
these years and only, only when Mr. Wolf retires and Ms. Rubaum takes over the
management, such wild hearsay accusations are made? I said
Mobasser v LASC; Wolf & Associates RPI APP-151, items 10d and 13b(2)
DECLARATION OF AFSANEH MOBASSER WITH EXHIBITS
your honor, you just said I am an
intelligent woman, why would an intelligent woman do such an irrational thing.
I explained that
is not something I did, nor would ever do because that is not who I am. I then referred to the declaration Dr.
Nikzad, my psychologist, had written the night before at my weekly session, and
read it to the Court, after handing Mr. Brennan a copy. It said that among
other things, she has been treating me for a victim mentality and my inability
to defend myself; that I do not have violent tendencies, and if I did, she
would not be working with me each week in the evenings at her isolated office
alone. I explained to the Court that I don’t touch food with unclean hands and
put it in my mouth, in fact a week before at my session with Dr. Nikzad, when I
got there she had eaten half a bag of popcorn and offered me the rest but I did
not touch it, and the week before that because I was so unwell, Dr. Lieberman
took a pill out of its seal and handed it to me and I asked him to give me
another. That it boggles my mind where plaintiff conjures up such wild
imagination. I then mentioned that the
night before Ms. Florence Flam, the eldest tenant in the building had come to
me for some help, as she does whenever she needs help and I asked her to write
a letter for me which I read to the court and showed the court the thank you cards
that she leaves by my door. I was
concerned about her loss of weight and would buy her cake so she would eat
because I know the elderly lose their appetite.
I said that I was concerned about her coughing and kept leaving messages
for my doctor, doctor Goodarzi, to get referrals for good pulmonologists. I said that when Fran read Ms. Rubaum’s
letter she was so angry and worried that she insisted that I go to my next door
neighbor, and ask him to come to testify at the hearing the next morning, because
she knows I have very friendly relationship with all my neighboring
tenants. And I asked the court to allow
me to bring declarations from every tenant in the building that I have very
cordial, pleasant relationship with all.
18. As to the claim in the Opposition’s
contention that Ms. Rubaum, the owner/manager was suffering a rise in her blood
pressure and was anxious about my continuing tenancy, I told court, “Your
honor, this woman has now responsibility for many properties spreading from
Palm Springs to Los Angeles…” The Court got really furious with me and said,
“You can’t say that, just because she’s rich” and started to leave. I explained
that’s not what I meant, I just wanted to point out that her recent stress
level and anxiety is because her father retired and she has to now manage all
the buildings the residential and commercial buildings they own, that it comes
with the territory and is not because of me, as she claimed in plaintiff’s
Opposition. That her taking over from
her father when he fully retired exactly correlates, interestingly, to when she
brought the first eviction against me and evicted several other tenants by
three day notices, except those tenants were not disabled and did not wish to
deal with her and could move so they did.
Mobasser v LASC; Wolf & Associates RPI APP-151, items 10d and 13b(2)
DECLARATION OF AFSANEH MOBASSER WITH EXHIBITS
19. I told the court that in her declaration, Ms.
Rubaum claims that last year in court a man approached them and told her that
he is my uncle and he has a care facility.
I said my uncles are dead and that man was a care giver for a very short
period of time, that I no longer know his whereabouts and the only family I
have is a cousin and his over 95 year old mother who lives with him and has
severe Alzheimer’s and other health issues.
In
the landlord’s Opposition to my request for stay pending appeal, it states that
the case I cited regarding the court of appeal’s reversal of denial of stay as
abuse of discretion, Mehr v. Sup. Ct.
(Finnegan) (1983) 139 C.A.3d 1044, 1050, 189 C.R. 138, that considered it
an abuse of discretion for a trial court to deny a stay pending appeal when the
tenant had lived in the home for 15 years (less than me), had children
(but no health issues) and was
willing to pay all past and future rents (as I am and as I am willing to remove
all my plants), the landlord’s attorney contends my case is not “analogous” for
comparison to that appellate decision and standard. I believe my case is more
compelling not only because of the longer time I have resided in the home, but
also because of the serious health issues I suffer from, and because the manner
in which the 3day notice to cure was framed makes it a way that tens of
thousands of residents of rent
stabilized housing units in Los
Angeles could be vacated by landlords for profit motives if this case is
allowed to stand and act as precedent. In Mehr,
there was only one house in dispute
about ownership. My case is an example of a landlord gaining advantage contrary
to the Municipal Ordinance that is meant to protect tenants from being evicted
simply so the landlord can make more money. The notice to cure demanding that
every tenant who lives in a building that allows plants on the balconies could
be used to demand removal and if the tenant does not do so within 3 days, they
are subject to eviction, rather than as in my case using less water if
“overwatering” is the claim that the landlord is making to set up the eviction.
This is not a case of non-payment of rent, but a contrived ‘breach of covenant’
and purported failure to cure, when I limited
watering, but did not remove all plants as the landlord demanded. No other
tenants have been asked to remove their plants because there is no lease
provision that prohibits maintaining plants on our balconies.
20. I told the court I have been living in my
home for 17 years. Then I told the Court that my case is more compelling than
the Mehr case becomes a matter of
public policy. And that Mr. Sands, my attorney was so convinced that the 3-day
notice was not legal and that it affects all the rent control units in Los
Angeles, so that is a real issue on appeal. I then said, “So please let them
[the Appellate Division] decide on this.” This is an L.A. City Ordinance, not a
private matter like in the Mehr case.
I said if your honor is wrong on the law, I would be put on the streets and
become homeless and might be dead by the time the issue is resolved by appeal.
21. Then I said the denial of my
constitutional right to a jury is an appealable issue with which the court
agreed. I told the Court that I had a previous case in Santa Monica where I
applied for waiver of fees and the waiver that was issued included jury fees,
which was won by unanimous jury on all causes of action. That is why when I filled the fee waiver form
and asked that I want it to include jury fees in this case, I assumed it also
included jury fees, but, although I asked the clerk multiple times, that is
every time I went to cour to give me a
copy of the fee waiver, the Clerk, Jubina, was too busy to copy it each time
and and never gave it to me. I told her I wanted it to include
Mobasser v LASC; Wolf & Associates RPI APP-151, items 10d and 13b(2)
DECLARATION OF AFSANEH MOBASSER WITH EXHIBITS
jury fees. Then I told the judge
the denial of jury was an appealable issue because it is a Constitutional
issue. I said, “My attorney made it clear that it was his mistake for not
ensuring that the jury fees were included or posted, twice in two motions and
he offered to post the fees right there and then before trial when in two
separate motions he made it clear to the judge the reason why I am asking for
the jury is that because I believe the court to be biased against me because of
my previous experience with the judge.Then I said that the jury denial was not
even mentioned in the Opposition, so that means they knew it was a good
appealable issue and that is why they are trying to hide it under the carpet.
22. Judge Brown said, “I agree that you have
a point and that’s an appealable issue.”
23. I also told the Court that, with regard
to the late rent payment notices included in the Opposition, that I received
disability payments on the 5th of each month and asked that the
landlord understand that, but they issued 3-day notices and I always paid the
rent from my disability income when it came soon as those notices where posted.
I told the Court I believed it was a pattern of harassment; that I had observed
many other tenants had notices posted on their doors over the years. I also
pointed out to the Court that letters the landlord presented were from 2004 and
wanted to address those as fabrications and why. The Court said it does not
want to hear from me on those.
24. When the landlord’s attorney, Mr.
Brennan, began speaking, he said, “Her case is not comparable to Mehr, because
there were three children and it was a case of fraud. As to the letters his
client presented from 2004 to help prove I was a “bad” person and tenant, he
said, “Forget they are hearsay, they show there were problems with [me] before
2005.” He told the Court the manager/owner spent $10,000 to evict me last year
but failed to mention I paid the attorney fees and costs in full as a condition
for relief from forfeiture without any accounting or receipt. Mr. Brennan
argued that I had done something improper by not bringing that motion for
relief back before Judge Brown (in fact, Judge Brown was on vacation, so Judge
Fox had to hear it because eviction was forthcoming, and he granted it based
upon my health issues and length of living there). Mr. Brennan then argued that
I had not removed the plants yet (but I agreed to do so today). Mr. Brennan said
to the court, “I am not a doctor, but I believe her doctors are wrong. They say
she may have a heart attack, but I say she won’t.” (I had told the Court that
even if the appeal is good, I may be dead by then.) Mr. Brennan argued that I
will be fine, that nothing is going to happen to me and that I can find housing
because I can tell any future landlord that I was evicted, but not because I
did not pay the rent on time and said that I had $16000 in back rent to pay
first and last even though the court had issued a
Mobasser v LASC; Wolf & Associates RPI APP-151, items 10d and 13b(2)
DECLARATION OF AFSANEH MOBASSER WITH EXHIBITS
judgment of over $16000, which
again boggles my mind how is it that I will have this money when the judgment
has been issued and I have to pay the judgement? He argued that the Court gave
me time to file a written reply and I failed to do so (my attorney refused).
Mr. Brennan then claimed that his client’s blood pressure had gone up. He
argued that his client/landlord would be sued because of me and she would be
bankrupt. He said, my client is here and can testify that she was there and saw
when Ms. Mobasser pushed potato chips into that woman’s mouth. (There is no
date, time, name or any other details or any record, or letter about this
fabricated incident until now.)
25.
26. The Court took the matter under
submission and told me to call to get the decision by noon. I called the Court
and was told the motion was denied at 1:30. I am attaching each of the letters
that I read to the Court during the hearing and that I gave copies to Mr.
Brennan.
27. I am asking this Court to issue an
immediate stay so the Sheriff will not evict me tomorrow, which is the last day
according to the Notice of Eviction. I can pay all of the rent that has not
been accepted by the landlord since they filed this action. I can pay the rent
as it comes due during the time it takes to appeal and receive this Court’s
decision. I will remove all of the plants from the balcony and agree not to
replace them or place any other plants on the balcony while the appeal is
pending if I am allowed to continue living in my home while I appeal.
28. Based on the facts in my motion
demonstrating extreme physical, mental, and emotional hardship that I will
suffer if evicted, and no irreparable harm for Wolf & Associates if I am
allowed to stay under the conditions I stipulate and agree with (listed in
paragraph 27, above) I contend that the trial court abused its discretion when
it denied my motion for an Order Staying the Eviction, considering the
mandatory language of CCP section 1176, the substantial issues presented for
appeal, and the factual circumstances established by the declarations; and also
when he denied my request for a temporary stay to Order Mr. Sands to continue
representing me considering the eviction deadline, or to allow me to obtain
another attorney and a reasonable time to do so, to continue my request for
stay on appeal.
I
declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing is true and correct. I executed this on January 25, 2013, at Los
Angeles, California.
________________________________
Afsaneh
Mobasser
No comments:
Post a Comment