Aljabban v. Fontana Indoor Swap Meet, Inc. (2020)

Citation: Aljabban v. Fontana Indoor Swap Meet, Inc. (2020)
Parent Document: Aljabban v. Fontana Indoor Swap Meet, Inc. (2020)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2020-09-10
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4784084/aljabban-v-fontana-indoor-swap-... ↗

Full Text

2,553 chars

Ruth Garcia operated the beauty salon in space H-2 from 1992 until
she retired and sold her business to Aljabban and Carrasco in July 2011 for
$15,000. After Garcia informed FISM that she intended to sell her business
to Aljabban and Carrasco, FISM approved Garcia’s transfer of space H-2 to
them and entered into a vendor’s permit with Aljabban and Carrasco.
      Shapiro testified that the vendor’s permit FISM entered into with
Aljabban and Carrasco was the same form contract that FISM uses for all of
its vendors, customized only to specify the name of the business, the business
                                         3
owners, a description of the type of commercial activity the vendor is
permitted to engage in at the swap meet, the amount of monthly rent, and
the amount of the security deposit. The vendor’s permit that Carrasco signed
in July 2011 specified Aljabban and Carrasco were the owners of the business
to be operated in space H-2 under the name “Millenia Beauty Salon,” that the
permit was for “hair salon” and “nail salon” uses, that the monthly rent
would be $1340.00, and that the security deposit was $2,680.00. The vendor’s
permit stated the “Commence Date” was August 1, 2011, and the “Expiration
Date” was August 1, 2012. On July 15, 2012, FISM entered into a renewed
vendor’s permit with Carrasco and Aljabban for the dates of August 1, 2012
to August 1, 2013, with identical terms to the original vendor’s permit.
      As the vendor’s permit is a central document in this lawsuit, we turn to
the relevant provisions in that document. Under the heading, “License
Agreement,” the vendor’s permit sets forth 25 separate paragraphs
constituting the terms of the agreement that Carrasco and Aljabban entered
into with FISM.
      As relevant here, paragraph 1 specifies that “Vendor is a licensee only.
This agreement is not intended to create a landlord tenant relationship. The
terms of this license is for the dates indicated above. This License Agreement
supersedes any prior contract or agreement between [FISM] and the Vendor
named above in this contract. The prior contract if any is null and void as of
the commencement date of this contract.”
      Paragraph 4 states, “Booth construction (i.e. walls, flooring, and
security gates) becomes a permanent fixture with the Swap Meet and may
not be removed or demolished by Vendor upon termination of the license.”
      Paragraph 7 states, “Vendor shall not sell, transfer, or assign Vendor’s
space or permit anyone else to occupy it or conduct business from Vendor’s

Other Sections in This Document (85)

Full Text