Opinion

Munguia-Brown v. Equity Residential

Court
District Court, N.D. California
Filed
Apr 8, 2024
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

9 JAVANNI MUNGUIA-BROWN, et al., Case No. 16-cv-01225-JSW

10 Plaintiffs,

ORDER RE INJUNCTIVE RELIEF,

11 v. FINAL DAMAGES AMOUNT, AND

ENTRY OF JUDGMENT

12 EQUITY RESIDENTIAL, et al.,

Defendants.

13

14

15 By entry of its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (“Findings”), the Court has

16 determined that the Standard Late Fee provision in Equity’s residential lease in California is null

17 and void. Before the Court enters final judgment, however, the parties must further brief, or

18 stipulate to, a couple of issues. The Court ORDERS Plaintiffs to brief or stipulate to the issues

19 that follow, by no later than May 3, 2024. Equity may file a response by no later than May 24,

20 2024, taking into account the findings of fact and conclusions of law made in the Court’s

21 Findings. Plaintiffs’ reply shall be due no later than June 7, 2024.

22 First, the Plaintiffs seek an injunctive relief that (1) permanently precludes Equity from

23 charging or collecting the Standard Late Fee; (2) permanently precludes Equity from including the

24 Standard Late Fee or any percentage-based late fee in any future leases; and (3) for three years

25 following judgment limits the amount of any late fee that Equity may charge during this period to

26 a reasonable amounts based on this Court’s findings regarding Equity’s actual damages

27 proximately caused by late rent, based on the evidence presented at trial.

1 [they] have suffered an irreparable injury; (2) that remedies available at law, such as monetary

2 || damages, are inadequate to compensate for that injury; (3) that, considering the balance of

3 hardships between the plaintiff and defendant, a remedy in equity is warranted; and (4) that the

4 || public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction.” eBay Inc. vy. MercExchange,

5 LLC, 547 U.S. 388, 391 (2006).

6

7 The Court finds that the factors for issuance of an injunction have not been fully briefed,

8 including the amount that Equity may charge instead of the $50 or 5 percent of the outstanding

9 rent.

10

11 Second, the Court requires that Plaintiff proffer the final judgment amount. This number

qa 12 shall not include the late-added $815,000 or prejudgment interest. This number must be updated

13 to include post-trial numbers. In performing these calculations, the parties must use Mr.

Breshears’ methods for calculating total late fee charges and payments. In calculating Equity’s

15

offset damages, the parties are instructed that this number is limited to a portion of their claimed

16

employee costs, as determined utilizing Mr. Schwarz’s multiple regression analysis, and Equity’s

18 lost use of funds figures must be determined utilizing Mr. Breshears’ methodology.

19

20 IT IS SO ORDERED. a)

21 |! Dated: April 8, 2024 ( | 4 ( tt

22 \ ! APS i

3 /JEFPRIEY S; WHATE

/ Unite//States Dystrict Judge

24

25

26

27

28

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.