Drawsand v. F.F. Props., L.L.P.

• Decision Date: 30 September 2011
• Docket Number: Case No. C 10–3937 SBA.
• Citation: 866 F.Supp.2d 1110
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California
• Parties: Pamela DRAWSAND, Plaintiff, v. F.F. PROPERTIES, L.L.P., Faifield Barrington Properties, Montelena Apartment Homes, Debra LNU, Christina Gibbens, Michal Nault, Diane Dwyer, Brian Fitzgerald, David Cabera, Ian Baldibad, Orase LNU, Ericksen, Arbuthnot, Kilduff, Day & Lindstrom, Joseph J. Minioza, Jodie G. Steinberg, Kimball, Tirey, & St. John, Shawn Bankson, Jane Creason, Stephen Modefferi, Stacey Rubin, Erica Garcia, Jon Rolefson, Lisa Imus, Alameda County Housing Authority, Christina Gouib, Ron Dion, Sharon DeCray, Navdeep Barn, Iven Michael Garcia, Rowena Ann Reyes Rivera, Jeffery Lougin, Kenisha Patrice Stephenson–Lougin, Alexander Concepcion, Kathy Lynn Concepcion, and Does 1–5, Defendants.

866 F.Supp.2d 1110

Pamela DRAWSAND, Plaintiff,

v.F.F. PROPERTIES, L.L.P., Faifield Barrington Properties, Montelena Apartment Homes, Debra LNU, Christina Gibbens, Michal Nault, Diane Dwyer, Brian Fitzgerald, David Cabera, Ian Baldibad, Orase LNU, Ericksen, Arbuthnot, Kilduff, Day & Lindstrom, Joseph J. Minioza, Jodie G. Steinberg, Kimball, Tirey, & St. John, Shawn Bankson, Jane Creason, Stephen Modefferi, Stacey Rubin, Erica Garcia, Jon Rolefson, Lisa Imus, Alameda County Housing Authority, Christina Gouib, Ron Dion, Sharon DeCray, Navdeep Barn, Iven Michael Garcia, Rowena Ann Reyes Rivera, Jeffery Lougin, Kenisha Patrice Stephenson–Lougin, Alexander Concepcion, Kathy Lynn Concepcion, and Does 1–5, Defendants.

Case No. C 10–3937 SBA.

United States District Court,

N.D. California,

Oakland Division.

Sept. 30, 2011.

Pamela Drawsand, Oakland, CA, pro se.

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION Docket 12, 13, 17, 47

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG, District Judge.

Pro se Plaintiff Pamela Drawsand (“Drawsand”) brings the instant action under the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), 42 U.S.C. § 3601, among other claims, against thirty-three defendants. The parties are presently before the Court on four sets of Defendants' respective motions to dismiss. Dkt. 12, 13, 17, 47. Having read and considered the papers filed in connection with this matter and being fully informed, the Court hereby GRANTS Defendants' motions and dismisses the action without leave to amend. The Court, in its discretion, finds this matter suitable for resolution without oral argument. SeeFed.R.Civ.P. 78(b); N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 7–1(b).

I. BACKGROUNDA. Factual Background

Drawsand alleges that she is a disabled individual who receives federally-funded low-income housing assistance under the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) program known as “Section 8.” Compl. ¶ 41, Dkt. 1. Drawsand's claims arise from her tenancy at Montelena Apartment Homes (“MAH”), located at 28650 Cork Oak Lane # 3208, Hayward, California, from 2006 through 2009. During that time, Drawsand alleges, inter alia, that she was harassed and assaulted by her neighbors, that MAH and its employees and related entities failed to take corrective action, and that her Section 8 specialist at the Housing Authority of Alameda (“HACA”) conspired with MAH to terminate her Section 8 benefits and to evict her.

The instant Complaint names thirty defendants, comprised of MAH and related entities and employees, the law firms and attorneys involved in state court lawsuits filed by Drawsand against her neighbors and MAH, the neighbors who allegedly harassed her, the law firm and its attorneys and state court judge involved in the unlawful detainer (“UD”) action brought against Drawsand, and HACA and various of its employees. The rambling and prolix Complaint spans 123 paragraphs and is difficult to decipher. These allegations are summarized below.

1. Lawsuit Against the Lougins and MAH

On May 12, 2006, Plaintiff signed a twelve-month lease with MAH to occupy Unit 3208. Id. A month after leasing her apartment, Plaintiff complained to MAH about “unusual noises” coming from her neighbors upstairs, Jeffery Lougin and Kenisha Patrice Stephenson–Lougin (collectively “the Lougins”), who lived in Unit 3308. Id. ¶ 44. Michael Nault of MAH suggested to Drawsand that she contact the Hayward Police Department because “there was nothing MAH could do.” Id. ¶ 45. The Lougins continued their harassment, and on October 14, 2006, both Nault and the Lougins “assaulted and battered plaintiff in MAH's leasing office.” Id. ¶ 50.

On November 7, 2006, MAH and Mr. Nault hired the law firm of Kimball, Tirey & St. John LLP (“the Kimball firm”) to serve Drawsand with a three-day notice to quit, allegedly for the purpose of harassing her. Id. ¶ 51. In turn, on November 26, 2006, Drawsand filed a lawsuit against Nault, the Lougins, MAH and Fairfield Barrington Properties LLC (erroneously sued as “Fairfield/Belmont Properties”) which she served on January 29, 2007. See Drawsand v. Montelena Apartment Homes, Alameda County Super. Ct., Case No. HG06300113 ( “Drawsand I” ); Defs.' Request for Judicial Notice (“RJN”) Ex. A, Dkt. 12–5; Compl. ¶ 57. MAH and Fairfield Barrington Properties LLC retained the law firm of Ericksen, Arbuthnot, Kilduff, Day & Lindstrom (“the Ericksen firm”) and its attorneys Joseph J. Minioza (“Minioza”) and Jodie G. Steinberg (“Steinberg”) as their counsel of record. RJN Ex. B.

After Drawsand served her complaint, MAH and Nault allegedly continued to harass her by, inter alia, demanding entry to her apartment under the guise of effecting necessary repairs. Id. Drawsand complained to her Section 8 Specialist, Sharon DeCray (“DeCray”), and later to Navdeep Barn (“Barn”), who replaced DeCray. Id. ¶ 58. Barn informed Drawsand that if she were evicted, she would no longer be eligible for Section 8. Id.

From February 2007 to November 2007, Drawsand was allegedly subjected to further harassment and assaults by the Lougins and MAH staff. Id. ¶¶ 58–73. In addition, Drawsand alleges that Barn was conspiring with MAH, and to that end, failed to recertify her for Section 8 benefits for a period of four months. Id. ¶ 73. However, Drawsand acknowledges that in December 2007, Barn changed Plaintiff's Section 8 status, which lowered her rental payment. Id. ¶ 73. Notwithstanding the allegedly continuing harassment, Drawsand voluntarily dismissed Drawsand I on February 8, 2008, one month prior to the hearing date on the defendants' motion for terminating sanctions. Id. Ex. C.

2. Lawsuit Against Other Neighbors and MAH

In the meantime, on January 5, 2008, Rven Michael Garcia and Rowena Ann Reyes Rivera (“Rivera”) became the new tenants in Unit 3308, which was formerly occupied by the Lougins. Id. ¶ 74. On February 16, 2008, Drawsand contacted Diane Dwyer (“Dwyer”) of MAH to complain about her new neighbors. Id. ¶ 77. ¹ On May 2, 2008, Drawsand met with Brian Fitzgerald (“Fitzgerald”), who replaced Dwyer, to discuss the “nuisances by # 3308 tenants and vandalism to her personal property.” Id. ¶ 81.

On July 9, 2008, Drawsand filed a lawsuit against MAH and Rivera, one of the tenants from Unit 3308. See Drawsand v. Montelena Apartment Homes, Alameda County Super. Ct., Case No. RG08397368; RJN, Ex. F. On the same date, Drawsand separately sued MAH and Lynn and Alex Concepcion, her neighbors in Unit 3108. See Drawsand v. Montelena Apartment Homes, Alameda County Super. Ct., Case No. RG08397361; RJN, Ex. D. The complaints in both actions are virtually identical, and alleged that her neighbors were noisy and had harassed her, and that MAH had failed to abate the “nuisance.” Id., Exs., D, F. MAH was again represented by the Ericksen firm and attorneys Minioza and Steinberg. RJN Exs. E, G; Compl. ¶ 86.

On December 23, 2008, the trial court consolidated the actions (“ Drawsand II”). Id., Ex. H. The Ericksen firm filed a motion for terminating sanctions based on Drawsand's failure to comply with her discovery obligations. Id., Ex. I. The court granted the motion and dismissed the actionwith prejudice on March 24, 2010. Id. Ex. J. Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal from the dismissal order. Id. Ex. K. The California Court of Appeal's website indicates that Drawsand's appeal was dismissed on February 2, 2011 for failure to designate the record on appeal. See Cal. Ct. of Appeal, First Dist., Dkt. No. A130873.²

3. Unlawful Detainer Action

On August 31, 2008, Drawsand attempted to pay her September 2008 rent by presenting a check to a person named “Orase” (last name unknown) at the MAH office. Compl. ¶ 38. On September 7, 2008, MAH returned the check to Drawsand. Id. ¶¶ 89–90. Drawsand attempted to tender payment two more times, but her rent was returned in each instance. Id. ¶¶ 91–92.

On October 5, 2008, MAH served Plaintiff with a three-day notice to quit for failure to pay rent. Id. ¶ 99. On October 9, 2008, F.F. Properties filed a UD action against Drawsand. Id. ¶ 101. F.F. Properties was represented by Jane Creason (“Creason”) of the Kimball firm, while James Margolis represented Drawsand.

Trial in the UD action commenced on November 14, 2008, and concluded on November 17, 2008. On November 20, 2008, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Jon Rolefson issued a Statement of Decision in favor of F.F. Properties. In his ruling, the court rejected Drawsand's claim that her eviction was in retaliation for her prior complaints regarding the habitability of the premises. Id. at 3. Drawsand now claims that Judge Rolefson's rulings were erroneous and denied her a fair trial. Compl. ¶ 107.

On December 4, 2008, the trial court stayed Drawsand's eviction until January 13, 2009. Id. ¶ 109. In February 2009, Drawsand contacted Barn, her Section 8 specialist, “about moving and the process.” Id. ¶ 112. Barn contacted Drawsand in March 2009 and notified her that she was going to be terminated from the Section 8 program based on having provided “false information.” Id. ¶ ¶ 113, 114. Drawsand requested an “informal hearing” at which the hearing officer concluded that she had not provided false information as alleged, and that she “should been [sic] granted a request to move.” Id. ¶ 115.

B. Procedural History

On September 1, 2010, Plaintiff filed the instant action against: F.F. Properties, L.L.P.; Fairfield Barrington LLC dba Montelena Apartment Homes (erroneously sued as Faifield Barrington Properties); MAH; Debra (last name unknown); Christina Gibbens; Michael Nault; Diane Dwyer; Brian Fitzgerald; David Cabera; Ian Baldibad; Orase (last name unknown); the Ericksen firm; Joseph Minioza; Jodie Steinberg; the Kimball firm; Shawn Bankson; Jane Creason; Stephen Modafferi (erroneously sued as Stephen Modefferi); Stacey Rubin; Rebecca Garcia (erroneously sued as Erica Garcia); Judge Jon Rolefson; Lisa Imus; HACA; Christina Gouib; Ron Dion; Sharon DeCray; Navdeep Barn; Michael Garcia; Rowena Ann Reyes Rivera; Jeffery Lougin; Kenisha Patrice...