4DCA Division 1 Oral Argument - 2026/05/12 - May 12, 2026

argument

4DCA Division 1 Oral Argument - 2026/05/12

California Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division One 4h 44m 6 chapters transcribed 1 month ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What procedural steps and technical issues are addressed at the beginning of the session?

Unknown 12:11

The three don't need to remember. Be and

Unknown 12:24

Unknown 16:02

Morning.

Unknown 16:36

Should we have a train?

Unknown 19:10

Good morning. This is Martha from the Kirk's office. I will be doing a quick check in for those of you repo uh here remotely. If you can please unmute yourselves and turn on your videos.

Unknown 19:30

Can you please state your presence when I call your name? So

Quanda King 19:33

I have uh Kwanda King, Pyrimpropur present. Attorney

Unknown 19:41

Leslie Uh Bruckner has it. Kate, I'm gonna ask you to please keep your micro microphones and videos off until your case is called. If you experience any technical difficulties during the oral argument session, immediately exit the video conference and use the phone number and the access code that I emailed you this morning. Okay, if you can please turn off your videos and your microphones and court will be with you shortly. Thank you. I think. Good morning, welcome to the Court of the Appeal, just a few things before we get started this morning. You come to argue, please make

Unknown 20:22

And they'll stop you in that argument to have you properly address it. Uh appellate table is to my right, respondent is to my left. Uh if you have to use a restroom, you have to come back through screening to come inside the courtroom. And uh while courts in session, please keep talking noise out to minimum. Any questions for me? Thanks, appreciate it.

Unknown 20:47

Do I have attorney Steven Scondura on the phone?

Steven Scondura 20:52

Yeah, good morning. How are you?

Unknown 20:54

So are you gonna be doing audio? Only.

Steven Scondura 20:57

I'd like to do video. I'd like to do video, but I don't have the link.

Unknown 21:00

Okay, so um yes, uh she just forwarded to you, so if you wanna go ahead and um if you wanna stay on the phone and then try the Zoom just to make sure that we have you on. Okay. All right, just make sure that you mute yourselves and turn off your video and Court will be with you shortly. Thank you.

Steven Scondura 21:17

Thank you.

Unknown 22:00

Yeah, trying to buy a lamb. My version also is not. He's not here yet. No, okay. Or just Checking sure.

Aaron Rubin 22:11

And the building. Oh he's not here yet. Okay. Yeah, he did say he was coming in person. Yeah,

Unknown 22:19

yeah, that's what we're doing. This one lost holes today.

Aaron Rubin 22:30

The first piece is

Unknown 22:39

Respond to see.

Unknown 23:39

Yeah.

Unknown 24:17

Can you see that? Good morning. Welcome to the Court of Appeal. With me on this first panel are Justice Dato to my left and Justice Doe to no, Justice Dato's to my right, to your left. Justice Stowe to my left. And uh we do have a couple of panel changes this morning, but on all the cases keep in mind we're familiar with your briefs. And uh so just highlight those issues you think are most important. The first case we're going to take is King versus Virus. Virus. How is it pronounced? Fires. And I understand uh Miss King is remote. Could you state your appearance, Miss King?

Quanda King 25:00

Yes, Quanda King, appellant improper.

Unknown 25:04

All right. Now you've asked for fifteen minutes to address the court. Do you want to save some of that time to respond to counsel for virus?

Quanda King 25:14

Yes, Your Honor.

Unknown 25:15

How much do you want to save?

Quanda King 25:17

Uh three minutes, please.

Unknown 25:18

All right, thank you. You may proceed.

Quanda King 25:21

Good morning, your honors. Again, my name is Quanda King, appellant appearing in Proport. The issue before this court is whether the undisputed facts in the record demonstrate that the appellant's claims lack merit and therefore could be properly disposed on of summary judgment. The trial court granted summary judgment primarily on rejudicata and collateral estapo grounds arising from the unlawful detainer judgment entered on april nineteenth, twenty twenty one. However, the unlawful detainer proceedings occurred during the height of the COVID nineteen eviction moratorium under extraordinary emergency legislation specifically enacted to protect tenants that suffered financial hardship due to the pandemic.

Quanda King 26:14

The undisputed facts establish that appellant was an covered person protected under California and federal tenant protections and that material misconduct surrounding the unlawful detainer proceedings deprived appellant of protections guaranteed by those laws. The causes of action therefore possess merit as a matter of law. Defendants fail to provide relocation assistance as required under California law.