Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Oviedo v. Windsor Twelve Properties, LLC, 212 Cal. App. 4th 97 (2012)

Citation
Oviedo v. Windsor Twelve Properties, LLC, 212 Cal. App. 4th 97 (2012)
Parent Document
Oviedo v. Windsor Twelve Properties, LLC, 212 Cal. App. 4th 97 (2012)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2012-11-19

Other Sections in This Document (59)

Full Text

666 chars
Respondents deny all of the allegations of malice. But the threshold here is low and none of the evidence put forth by respondents negates the evidence in appellant’s favor as a matter of law. As our summary of the record at the outset of this opinion shows, the tone of the relationship between appellant and Myers was hostile and divisive. “While these circumstances do not conclusively establish malice, they are sufficient to allow the issue to go to the trier of fact for resolution.” (Bergman v. Drum (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 11, 25 [28 Cal.Rptr.3d 112].) As a result, we conclude that appellant has met her burden with respect to this element. c. Probable Cause