Adams v. Kaplan
This appeal arises from an occupancy dispute over a cabin in Mendocino County owned by appellant Morris Kaplan.[1] The trial court found that occupancy of the cabin by Michael Adams and Katherine Sontag (collectively Plaintiffs) constituted a tenancy at will and that Kaplan failed to provide Plaintiffs a 30-day notice of his intent to terminate the tenancy as required by Civil Code section 789. The trial court awarded “nominal†damages in the amount of $250 and the costs of suit in an amount subject to proof. Kaplan, appearing in propria persona, contends that an award of damages in any amount was error because, inter alia, the occupancy was not a tenancy at will and Plaintiffs had acted with unclean hands. We find that Kaplan has forfeited any argument that the trial court’s findings are unsupported by substantial evidence, and that the trial court did not err in rejecting Kaplan’s equitable defense, but we conclude that $250 is in excess of the amount that can legally constitute nominal damages. We will modify the judgment accordingly, but otherwise affirm.
Comments on Adams v. Kaplan