Sue Former Landlord in Small Claims Court

[RightTheWrong]

What is the name of your state? California

What I'm After
Sue my former landlord in small claims court for unlawfully withholding a big portion of my security deposit.

The Landlord
A LLC (let's call it MyFormerBuilding) owned by a huge national rental management corporation (let's call it RentalCorp).

Location
San Diego, California.

Steps I've Taken
I've sent MyFormerBuilding's leasing office (and RentalCorp's local office) a demand letter by email asking for my money back. When I didn't hear back from them, I mailed them the demand letter using certified mail. It was signed as received but it's been over 2 months and I haven't heard back from them.

Here's the info I gathered so far for the lawsuit application
1. I have the serving agent name/address for MyFormerBuilding, let's call it ServingAgentOne. ServingAgentOne is incorporated in Delaware and has a serving agent in CA, let's call it ServingAgentTwo. Both ServingAgentOne and ServingAgentTwo use each other as serving agents (cyclic) and they both have the same contact address in their Secretary of State filings.
2. MyFormerBuilding's status with the Secretary of State shows "FTB Suspended". SOS shows that they filed their 2020 Statement of Information. Also, the partial refund check I got has their legal entity name on it. It's weird how they can still be doing business when their Franchise Tax Board status is suspended. Their business couldn't have went bankrupt; they are a huge business and I pass by their "buzzing" complex every day.
3. I have documented all communications and evidence since I left the unit about 5 months ago. I even have 100+ before/after pictures that support my case.

My Questions
1. Am I right in going after MyFormerBuilding and not their parent company RentalCorp?
2. Since MyFormerBuilding's serving agent has a serving agent themselves as well, which one should I serve? I'm assuming it'll be ServingAgentOne as it's MyFormerBuilding direct serving agent.

Thanks!!

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state? California

What I'm After
Sue my former landlord in small claims court for unlawfully withholding a big portion of my security deposit.

The Landlord
A LLC (let's call it MyFormerBuilding) owned by a huge national rental management corporation (let's call it RentalCorp).

Location
San Diego, California.

Steps I've Taken
I've sent MyFormerBuilding's leasing office (and RentalCorp's local office) a demand letter by email asking for my money back. When I didn't hear back from them, I mailed them the demand letter using certified mail. It was signed as received but it's been over 2 months and I haven't heard back from them.

Here's the info I gathered so far for the lawsuit application
1. I have the serving agent name/address for MyFormerBuilding, let's call it ServingAgentOne. ServingAgentOne is incorporated in Delaware and have a serving agent in CA, let's call it ServingAgentTwo. Both ServingAgentOne and ServingAgentTwo use each other as serving agents and they both have the same contact address in their Secretary of State filings.
2. MyFormerBuilding's status with the Secretary of State shows "FTB Suspended". SOS shows that they filed their 2020 Statement of Information. Also, the partial refund check I got has their legal entity name on it. It's weird how they can still be doing business when their Franchise Tax Board status is suspended. Their business couldn't have went bankrupt; they are a huge business.
3. I have documented all communications and evidence since I left the unit about 5 months ago. I even have 100+ before/after pictures that support my case.

My Questions
1. Am I right in going after MyFormerBuilding and not their parent company RentalCorp?
2. Since MyFormerBuilding's serving agent has a serving agent themselves as well, which one should I serve? I'm assuming it'll be ServingAgentOne as it's MyFormerBuilding direct serving agent.

Thanks!!

I would likely include both of them in the suit if I were in your shoes...just to cover your bases.

 

[RightTheWrong]

I would likely include both of them in the suit if I were in your shoes...just to cover your bases.

Thanks for your prompt reply. I didn't know I can sue more than 1 at the same time.

 

[Zigner]

I would likely include both of them in the suit if I were in your shoes...just to cover your bases.

That's not always the wisest course of action as it could lead to penalties if the OP is aware (or, should be aware) that they should not be suing that entity.

 

[Zigner]

Thanks for your prompt reply. I didn't know I can sue more than 1 at the same time.

You can, but it's not necessarily the best way to do things. You should consult with an attorney to confirm.

 

[LdiJ]

That's not always the wisest course of action as it could lead to penalties if the OP is aware (or, should be aware) that they should not be suing that entity.

The entity is involved. Therefore there is no potential danger in this situation.

 

[Zigner]

The entity is involved. Therefore there is no potential danger in this situation.

I don't see how you can claim that the parent entity is "involved" in this matter so categorically. Simply being the parent company of an entity against which one files a lawsuit does not make that parent entity automatically involved.

Tell me this...are you going to reimburse the OP is s/he is sanctioned?

 

[zddoodah]

I have the serving agent name/address for MyFormerBuilding, let's call it ServingAgentOne. ServingAgentOne is incorporated in Delaware and has a serving agent in CA, let's call it ServingAgentTwo. Both ServingAgentOne and ServingAgentTwo use each other as serving agents (cyclic) and they both have the same contact address in their Secretary of State filings.

As an LLC, MyFormerBuilding must have a designated agent for service of process. You can find out who it is at the Secretary of State's website. If ServingAgentOne is MyFormerBuilding's registered agent, then you serve MyFormerBuilding by serving ServingAgentOne. The registered agent for ServingAgentOne is utterly irrelevant.

MyFormerBuilding's status with the Secretary of State shows "FTB Suspended". SOS shows that they filed their 2020 Statement of Information. Also, the partial refund check I got has their legal entity name on it. It's weird how they can still be doing business when their Franchise Tax Board status is suspended.

Business entities continue doing business despite being under FTB suspension all the time. I don't know that I'd go so far as to say it's common, but it's not at all weird.

Their business couldn't have went bankrupt; they are a huge business and I pass by their "buzzing" complex every day.

Being big and having a "'buzzing' complex" doesn't prevent bankruptcy. Companies far bigger than your former landlord have filed for bankruptcy protection. Texaco filed in 1987. Chrysler and General Motors filed in 2009. Ever heard of Enron? Washington Mutual Bank and Lehman Brothers in 2008.

Am I right in going after MyFormerBuilding and not their parent company RentalCorp?

Probably, assuming MyFormerBuilding is the entity named on your lease.

Since MyFormerBuilding's serving agent has a serving agent themselves as well, which one should I serve? I'm assuming it'll be ServingAgentOne as it's MyFormerBuilding direct serving agent.

As noted above, that's correct.

I would likely include both of them in the suit if I were in your shoes...just to cover your bases.

On what legal basis? A parent of an LLC has no liability for the LLC's obligations in the absence of particular facts that aren't even hinted at in the original post.

I didn't know I can sue more than 1 at the same time.

You can, but that doesn't mean you should. If you name multiple entities, you'll pay 2x the cost of serving process. Without a legal basis for suing the parent entity, I can't see any benefit in incurring the additional cost.

The entity is involved. Therefore there is no potential danger in this situation.

Huh? Nothing the OP has posted indicates any "involvement" by the parent entity. That said, I agree there's no danger in sanctions for frivolously naming the parent entity, but it's because it's small claims court, and small claims judges aren't going to hold litigants to anything close to the same standard as a regular superior court judge. Heck...even in regular superior court, my employer's parent entity gets sued improperly all the time. We wouldn't even conceive of seeking sanctions (throwing good money after bad).

 

[LdiJ]

I don't see how you can claim that the parent entity is "involved" in this matter so categorically. Simply being the parent company of an entity against which one files a lawsuit does not make that parent entity automatically involved.

Tell me this...are you going to reimburse the OP is s/he is sanctioned?

Are you going to back up the OP if her case is dismissed because the right party wasn't included?

 

[LdiJ]

That said, I agree there's no danger in sanctions for frivolously naming the parent entity, but it's because it's small claims court, and small claims judges aren't going to hold litigants to anything close to the same standard as a regular superior court judge. Heck...even in regular superior court, my employer's parent entity gets sued improperly all the time. We wouldn't even conceive of seeking sanctions (throwing good money after bad

That is what I meant by "involved". As the parent company there is some inherent involvement which makes judges unlikely to sanction the parties, even if the judge ends up dismissing the parent company from the lawsuit.[/QUOTE]

 

[RightTheWrong]

As an LLC, MyFormerBuilding must have a designated agent for service of process. You can find out who it is at the Secretary of State's website. If ServingAgentOne is MyFormerBuilding's registered agent, then you serve MyFormerBuilding by serving ServingAgentOne. The registered agent for ServingAgentOne is utterly irrelevant.



Business entities continue doing business despite being under FTB suspension all the time. I don't know that I'd go so far as to say it's common, but it's not at all weird.



Being big and having a "'buzzing' complex" doesn't prevent bankruptcy. Companies far bigger than your former landlord have filed for bankruptcy protection. Texaco filed in 1987. Chrysler and General Motors filed in 2009. Ever heard of Enron? Washington Mutual Bank and Lehman Brothers in 2008.



Probably, assuming MyFormerBuilding is the entity named on your lease.



As noted above, that's correct.



On what legal basis? A parent of an LLC has no liability for the LLC's obligations in the absence of particular facts that aren't even hinted at in the original post.



You can, but that doesn't mean you should. If you name multiple entities, you'll pay 2x the cost of serving process. Without a legal basis for suing the parent entity, I can't see any benefit in incurring the additional cost.



Huh? Nothing the OP has posted indicates any "involvement" by the parent entity. That said, I agree there's no danger in sanctions for frivolously naming the parent entity, but it's because it's small claims court, and small claims judges aren't going to hold litigants to anything close to the same standard as a regular superior court judge. Heck...even in regular superior court, my employer's parent entity gets sued improperly all the time. We wouldn't even conceive of seeking sanctions (throwing good money after bad).

Thank you so much for going into details and clearing things up, much appreciated. Now I need to go read up on filling out the form and how to serve and will come back with more questions if stumble across any. Thanks again

 

[Zigner]

That is what I meant by "involved". As the parent company there is some inherent involvement which makes judges unlikely to sanction the parties, even if the judge ends up dismissing the parent company from the lawsuit.

First - no it's not what you meant by "involved". What you meant by "involved" is that you thought the parent company might have some liability.
Second - I agree that sanctions are unlikely, heck, even highly unlikely, but they are still allowed for under the law. Zddoodah doesn't state otherwise, rather, he's stating that they won't happen because of the nature of the court in question (not the law).

 

[zddoodah]

Now I need to go read up on filling out the form and how to serve and will come back with more questions if stumble across any.

This is probably the best online resource on California small claims courts.

That said, I agree there's no danger in sanctions for frivolously naming the parent entity, but it's because it's small claims court, and small claims judges aren't going to hold litigants to anything close to the same standard as a regular superior court judge. Heck...even in regular superior court, my employer's parent entity gets sued improperly all the time. We wouldn't even conceive of seeking sanctions (throwing good money after bad).

That is what I meant by "involved". As the parent company there is some inherent involvement which makes judges unlikely to sanction the parties, even if the judge ends up dismissing the parent company from the lawsuit.

I'm not sure what "that" refers to in this sentence. Nothing in my prior post that you quoted speaks to the parent entity in the OP's situation being "involved" in anything. Look at the original post. It only says that the OP's landlord (an LLC) is "owned by a huge national rental management corporation." So what? That doesn't speak to any "involvement" in the OP's situation. The OP then told us that he/she sent his/her demand LT to the parent entity in addition to the landlord, but that doesn't make the parent entity "involved." Simply, there is no factual basis for suing the parent entity. Just because the risk of sanctions for frivolously naming the parent entity is negligible doesn't mean it's a good idea to waste money on a separate service fee.