Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

section 6

Citation
section 6
Parent Document
250 LLC v. Photopoint Corp.(usa), 32 Cal. Rptr. 3d 296 (2005)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2005-07-28

Other Sections in This Document (165)

Full Text

952 chars
The court excluded paroi evidence at trial, and ruled that 250 was “entitled to pursue its rights of setoff.” The court found that PhotoPoint was entitled to a credit for the security deposit and letter of credit funds 250 retained ($49,454.17 + $563,777.49) against the damages 250 sustained. The court found that 250 was required to return the security deposit and letter of credit funds to PhotoPoint “within the time frame provided by Civil Code section 1950.7,” but that PhotoPoint sustained no actual damages as a result of the statutory violation because those funds could be applied against 250’s damages. The court awarded PhotoPoint a statutory penalty of $100 for 250’s violation of section 1950.7. The court entered a net judgment of $944,567.12 in favor of 250, representing 250’s damages of $1,557,898.78, less the security deposit and letter of credit funds of $613,231.66 and the $100 statutory penalty. II. DISCUSSION A. Section 1950.7