Contracting parties build liquidated damages provisions into their agreements in a variety of contexts.
The long moratorium on most evictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the de facto shutdown of the court system for civil matters, caused most California landlords to defer unlawful detainer and related landlord-tenant litigation over the past two-and-a-half years.
Two cases from different appellate districts in California have come to different conclusions about the enforceability of co-tenancy provisions. This article describes co-tenancy provisions, discusses liquidated damages and alternative performance, and then reviews Grand Prospect and JJD in detail to compare the reasoning in each case.
Addressing an issue of first impression in California, the Court of Appeal for the Second District has confirmed that businesses compelled to cease operations as a result of governmental directives issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic cannot look to their property insurance carriers to cover the lost business income.
If an individual contracts COVID-19 after visiting a specific property, and the exposure of the COVID-19 is traced to that specific property, who is liable to the individual?
Under California law, a provision of a contract found to impose a penalty is unenforceable as a forfeiture and contrary to public policy.