CITY OF SANTA MONICA v. GONZALEZ
Filed 5/31/06; pub. order 6/27/06 (see end of opn.)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
| CITY OF SANTA MONICA, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GUILLERMO GONZALEZ, Defendant and Appellant. | B182104 c/w B184549 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. SS013071) |
| GUILLERMO GONZALEZ, Petitioner, v. LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent; CITY OF SANTA MONICA, Real Party in Interest. | B184127 |
APPEALS from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Lisa Hart Cole, Judge; petition for writ of mandate/prohibition. Orders affirmed; petition denied.
The Law Office of Stan Stern and Stan Stern for Defendant and Appellant, and Petitioner.
Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney, and Adam Radinsky, Deputy City Attorney, for Plaintiff and Respondent, and Real Party in Interest.
No appearance for Respondent.
INTRODUCTION
Guillermo Gonzalez (Gonzalez) appeals from an order granting a motion by the City of Santa Monica (City) to appoint a receiver and an order denying his motion for reconsideration (B182104). His second appeal is from an order granting the receiver's application to take specified actions and from an order declining to stay the previous order appointing a receiver (B184549). Gonzalez also petitions this court for a writ of mandate/prohibition invalidating the order appointing a receiver and all subsequent orders. Concurrently with his petition for writ of mandate/prohibition, Gonzalez requested a stay of the proceedings below. We granted Gonzalez's request for a stay and agreed to consider his writ petition concurrently with the appeal. We now affirm the orders, deny the writ petition and vacate the stay.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Gonzalez is the owner of a three-unit residential property at 2438 Ocean Park Boulevard in Santa Monica. Gonzalez lives with his family on the first floor of the main building and rents out the unit on the second floor of the main building as well as a unit in the garage.
In August 1989, in response to unsafe and unsanitary conditions at the property, the City filed a civil nuisance lawsuit against Gonzalez, alleging violations of the uniform building, fire, mechanical, plumbing and electrical codes. Gonzalez failed to answer the complaint or appear in court. On August 24, 1990, the court issued a default judgment and permanent injunction that ordered Gonzalez to demolish certain structures on the property that had been built without permits. The judgment gave the City the power to do the demolition work itself if Gonzalez did not do it within 30 days. He did not. In January 1991, the City did the demolition work at a cost of $21,939.93. In May 1991, the City recorded a lien in that amount against the property, which it collected when Gonzalez refinanced his mortgage. On May 14, 1997, the City filed an 85-count misdemeanor criminal complaint against Gonzalez alleging violations of the building, fire, housing, plumbing, and electrical codes. Gonzalez pled guilty to fifteen of the counts. As part of his probation, the City ordered Gonzalez to correct all code violations within 30 days.
On October 30, 1997, the court found Gonzalez in violation of his probation for failing to correct the code violations. It sentenced him to serve 60 days in jail. On February 3, 1998, the court again found Gonzalez in violation of probation for failing to correct the violations and sentenced him to 90 days in jail. On March 3, 1998, the court again found Gonzalez in violation of probation for failing to correct the violations and sentenced him to 450 days in jail. Gonzalez was taken into custody on March 17, 1998, and spent 280 days in jail for refusing to correct the code violations on his property.
City inspectors returned to the property on January 18, 2001 after receiving information from the Santa Monica Fire Department. Their inspection revealed numerous continuing code violations. On May 31, 2001, the City filed a second criminal complaint against Gonzalez, containing 32 misdemeanor counts for the code violations, many of which were identical to those in the first criminal case. On April 2, 2002, Gonzalez pled guilty to six of the counts. The court ordered him to correct all code violations on the property by May 15, 2002. The court gave the City authority to enter the property and abate the violations if Gonzalez failed to do so. As part of its order, the court also ruled that any violations on the property that remained uncorrected after 30 days would be deemed to be a public nuisance without the necessity of further hearing, order or action by the City. The court placed Gonzalez on probation until April 2005.
On May 15, 2002, City inspectors re-inspected the property and found numerous continuing violations. On May 23, 2002, Gonzalez was personally served with a Notice and Order to Comply (Notice). The Notice listed the code violations still present on Gonzalez's property. It stated that Gonzalez was â€
