Collateral Estoppel

[sbvalet]

My question involves a security deposit in the State of: CALIFORNIA

I was a tenant in CA, and the landlord failed to return my security deposit within 21 days. I sued in small claims court and received a default judgment (He didnt show up) for the amount of the security deposit ($2,300) + my court costs. The judgment stated $1800 + $500 punitive damages. (I indicated that there was probably $500 worth of repairs necessary when we moved out). I did not ask for punitive damages, although I learned after my case that in CA you can sue for 2x the amount of the deposit ($4,600) for bad faith retention of the deposit.

The landlord (who is an attorney) has subsequently sued me in Superior Court (limited Civil action) claiming breach and contract and negligence and says I own him $4,600+ because I promised to fix issues with the property before moving out - and failed to do so - and so he could not re-rent the property and lost two months rent while he rectified the issues (touch up paint, dirty carpets, etc.) His claims are baseless and malicious.

In filing my answer to his claim - can I file a cross complaint asking for punitive damages for bad faith witholding of the deposit - or does this amount to Collateral Estopel since the issue was already decided in the lower court? Can I also cross complain for malicious prosecution? Anything else I can throw in the cross complaint?
Thanks!

[KeyWestDan]

Probably not in small claims, but as this is in superior court then you can use everything that is available.

You don't have to answer the complaint immediately. You just have to respond. You'd have to learn some CA law in a hurry. First, I would file a motion to dismiss on collateral estoppel or res judiciata grounds as he had his chance to litigate this issue in small claims and the parties and underlying cause of the action is the same.

Include whatever law you can come up with. He will file a response. The motion will get set for a hearing and both sides get to argue their positions, etc. and the court will issue an order. If you lose that, then you will have so many days to file an answer. Then you can raise your counterclaims which he has to answer.

However, be sure to check filing fees in that court. For many years, counterclaims were free, on the plaintiff's dime. But now, here in FL for instance, there is a filing fee for counterclaims, which is as much as the original filing, like $395, plus the service fee.

No, malicious prosecution is NOT available to you. That is for criminal cases, and you have to be found not guilty, prove there was no probable cause in the first place, etc. The tort in a civil case is abuse of process. I doubt that will fly but you can throw it in if you can show it is not frivilous. Any tort you want to include, be sure you establish all the elements.

Then you do discovery and see what his evidence is and if you can overcome it. For instance, I doubt he has pictures that can really prove anything. How does he prove it is your unit? Chances are they won't have date and time stamps either. If it is just between testimony, then whoever tells the best story will probably win.

Just because someone is a lawyer doesn't mean they know what they are doing, or they can get so arrogant they get really messy. I could give you examples you would never believe.

[Mr. Knowitall]

Whether collateral estoppel is fair and consistent with public policy in a particular case depends in part upon the character of the forum that first decided the issue later sought to be foreclosed. In this regard, courts consider the judicial nature of the prior forum, i.e., its legal formality, the scope of its jurisdiction, and its procedural safeguards, particularly including the opportunity for judicial review of adverse rulings. (See, e.g., United States v. Utah Constr. Co. (1966) 384 U.S. 394, 421-22, 86 S.Ct. 1545, 16 L.Ed.2d 642 (Utah Constr. Co.) [findings by Board of Contract Appeals were entitled to collateral estoppel where agency acted in "judicial capacity," findings were relevant to issues presented, parties had full and fair opportunity to litigate, and judicial review of adverse findings was available]; People v. Sims (1982) 32 Cal.3d 468, 479-182, 186 Cal.Rptr. 77, 651 P.2d 321 (Sims) [Utah Constr. Co. test permits collateral estoppel effect, in criminal action, for prior findings of Department of Social Services]; Sanderson v. Niemann (1941) 17 Cal.2d 563, 573-575, 110 P.2d 1025 (Sanderson) [small claims judgments not entitled to collateral estoppel effect, given informality of proceedings, including limited right to judicial review]; cf. Pacific Estates, Inc. v. Superior Court (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 1561, 1572-1575, 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 434 [collateral estoppel against nonparty insurers inappropriate where nature of proceedings did not guarantee full litigation of facts, and nonparty insurers could not, as matter of law, seek judicial review].)

You, however, cannot relitigate issues that you've already litigated to a final judgment in small claims court.