Plaintiff sued Defendant for breach of a commercial lease. Defendant argued the lease was unenforceable because it required he occupy an unlawful building and use it for an illegal purpose. His defense was premised on a theory that a portion of the building’s second story was illegally constructed. Following a 10-day trial in front of a referee, the trial court entered judgment for Plaintiff and awarded it more than $10 million in damages. On appeal, Defendant contended the court erroneously rejected his illegality defense and awarded Plaintiff excessive damages.
The Court of Appeal affirmed. It concluded that the referee’s finding that Defendants failed to prove when the second story was built precluded him from demonstrating the Building fell outside the grandfather provision.
Court of Appeal Opinion – View Document
© 2025 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
6420 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1100
Los Angeles, California 90048
p: (310) 859 7811 | f: (310) 276 5261
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
p: (415) 315 1774
© 2025 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
We welcome your inquiry. However, sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. For that reason, you should not send us any kind of confidential information. Until we have agreed to represent you, we cannot be obligated to keep it confidential.