Real Estate Litigation Blogs

Alternatives to Litigation in Your California Real Estate Dispute

Regardless of whether you are a residential homeowner who has discovered a material, undisclosed defect in your property, or a commercial property owner facing a revolt from tenants over extremely costly building repair issues, the threat of a legal dispute can send shivers up your spine when you think about a long battle in the court system that drains financial resources and puts the state of your property in what can feel like a never-ending existential limbo.

Resolving a real estate dispute, however, does not have to involve a long courtroom litigation involving discovery, depositions, filings, trial preparation, trial, and all the delays and financial costs that can entail. There are in fact several alternatives to litigation in your California real estate dispute, and an experienced California real estate dispute attorney can help you assess your options in pursuing the optimal outcome in your dispute.

 

Having an Attorney Negotiate On Your Behalf

Both residential and commercial deals are typically driven primarily by people without extensive legal backgrounds. Even if a real estate attorney helped draft or review a real estate agreement, the parties themselves may be unfamiliar or unclear with the underlying legal issues that will resolve the dispute.

Thus, sometimes engaging a real estate dispute attorney who can assess the situation, determine how a court would resolve the matter under applicable legal principles and precedent, and then explain that to the other party can diffuse hostility and bring both parties to a mutually agreeable end to the dispute via a robust negotiation.

 

Entering into Voluntary Mediation

Mediation is also an effective method for resolving real estate disputes. In mediation, both parties will come before a mediator whose job it is not to decide “who wins” but rather to work with the parties to help them understand each other’s perspectives (which can indeed include perspectives informed by the law) and help them to reach a settlement agreement on all of their issues which ends the dispute.

Mediation is an informal process, and does not involve the costs and delays of litigation, but parties can work with their own legal counsel in preparing for and conducting the mediation, as well as in reaching a new agreement to resolve differences stemming from a real estate dispute.

 

Submitting to Binding Arbitration

Arbitration is different from mediation in that the parties forgo their right to go to court and agree to submit to what an arbitrator decides. While experienced arbitrators are often retired judges who have the knowledge of the law to effectively reach a fair outcome, like mediation, it does not involve the more costly aspects of litigation such as discovery, depositions, and extensive legal filings over months and even years.

Speak to an experienced California real estate dispute attorney about what options – including litigation – might be best for resolving your California real estate dispute.

 

Contact the Real Estate Dispute Attorneys at Wagenseller Law Firm

At Wagenseller Law Firm in downtown Los Angeles, we provide full legal services to individuals and businesses in business and real estate disputes. We provide counsel and representation to landlords, developers, commercial tenants, and investors alike. Contact Wagenseller Law Firm today to schedule a consultation to discuss your real estate matter.

Are Liquidated Damages Clause Enforceable in CA Commercial Real Estate Contracts?

“Liquidated damages” may sound like the name of a long-lost Nirvana b-side, but instead they refer to clauses often buried towards the end of a long contract which purport to state what financial compensation one party must pay another in the event of the breach of a contract.

While liquidated damages have a very long history of appearing in contracts – after all, the whole purpose of a contract is to set out ahead of time what each party should do in the future, and this clause takes it even further to say what each party should do if one doesn’t actually do what is in the rest of the contract – but they also have a very long history of being invalidated by courts.

Why Courts Are Suspicious of Liquidated Damages Clauses

Why do courts so often invalidate liquidated damages clauses? In one respect, courts don’t love it when one party in a contract decides it will take the place of the court in determining what happens in the case of a breach.

But, relatedly, courts look on liquidated damages clause with suspicion, as they can be used as a coercive tool to force a less powerful party to follow through with an obligation against its will because there is a huge penalty hanging over their head, which might indeed be far greater than what a court would award in a breach of contract action.

Liquidated Damages Clauses in CA Commercial Real Estate Contracts

California courts, in particular, are notorious for invalidating contract clauses that, by definition, both parties agreed to, e.g. non-compete clauses in employment agreements. California courts have indeed taken a similar approach to liquidation clauses over the years.

That said, California courts are willing to enforce a liquidated damages provision where it is not reasonable, pursuant to the California civil procedure code, which states, “a provision in a contract liquidating the damages for the breach of the contract is valid unless the party seeking to invalidate the provision establishes that the provision was unreasonable under the circumstances existing at the time the contract was made.”

This brings up the question of what is and what is not reasonable. In essence, courts find liquidated damages clauses reasonable where they are actually based on a reasonable attempt to determine what the financial injury would be to the non-breaching party in the case of a breach by the other party. This means looking at the actual money lost by the non-breaching party, as well as associated administrative costs, e.g. the cost associated with finding a similar property, buyer, tenant, etc., to replace the breaching party.

Where courts will not validate such clauses is where they go far beyond what the actual costs of the breach would be and appear to be more of a penalty for the potentially breaching party which induces them not to breach. For example, if the cost of the breach for the non-breaching party would be approximately $50,000 but the liquidated damages clause asks for a $500,000 payment, this would appear to be more of a penalty than a reasonable estimate of losses, and thus would be more likely to be invalidated by a court.

Contact the Real Estate Litigation Attorneys at Wagenseller Law Firm

At Wagenseller Law Firm in downtown Los Angeles, we provide full legal services to individuals and businesses in business and real estate litigation matters. Contact Wagenseller Law Firm today to schedule a consultation to discuss your real estate matter.

Knowing Whether an Easement Exists on Your Property

Whether you own property as a residential or business owner, it can come as an unpleasant surprise when you suddenly see a neighbor or even a stranger on your property, using it as their own. Perhaps they are fishing in a boat on your lake, using your driveway to haul trash, or even putting up power lines across your lawn.

When you go out to confront the person and even threaten to call the police for trespassing, the response might be that that person or the entity they represent has what is called an easement on your property. Essentially, an easement is a limited property interest in your land by another party to use that land for some particular purpose.

Ideally you would have known about this easement before you took possession, and not knowing might be the fault of the seller (for which you could potentially take legal action) or simply due to not understanding the real estate contract.

But the first step will be to determine whether an easement actually exists. You should speak with a real estate attorney to get an informed perspective on your particular situation to determine whether the easement is legitimate or not – and there are at least 11 different ways for an easement to come into place in California – but here are the four basic ways an easement might have been created on your property.

An Express Easement

An express easement is one that was specifically granted to the holder of the easement by the owner of your property, presumably a former owner if you do not recall expressly giving someone else the right to use your property.

This does not mean that a one-time orally-given permission to let your neighbor ride his tractor across your property means he has an easement. Instead the grant of the easement must be in writing to be enforceable.

An Implied Easement

Also called “an implied easement by existing use,” this type of easement only comes into existence when a property owner at one time owned undivided property and then later divided that property into multiple parcels, which could include the property you have now and the property owned by the person claiming to have the easement.

In addition, there is the added requirement that the use of the easement have been in use since the division of the property. For example, if a previous owner sold part of his land including a lake to another person, and continued to use the lake to dock his boat after the sale, there might be an implied easement to keep using the lake in that manner.

An Easement by Necessity

An easement by necessity does not require that both properties have once been under common ownership, but there is the higher bar that the presumptive easement holder must have a necessity in using the easement. This is commonly seen where access to a road from one property is only available by driving across the other property.

A Prescriptive Easement

A prescriptive easement is similar to the concept of adverse possession. In California, a prescriptive easement can be created when one person uses another person’s property for some limited use (e.g. walking across it to get to the beach) in a relatively continuous manner for at least five years when the property owner either knew of the use or reasonably should have known of the use.

Contact the Real Estate Litigation Attorneys at Wagenseller Law Firm

At Wagenseller Law Firm in downtown Los Angeles, we provide full legal services to individuals and businesses in business and real estate litigation matters. We provide counsel and representation to landlords, developers, commercial tenants, and investors alike. Contact Wagenseller Law Firm today to schedule a consultation to discuss your real estate matter.

Why Establishing Fraud in Addition to Misrepresentation in a CA Real Estate Litigation Matters

If you purchased a residential or commercial property, and you ended up getting something different than what you thought were getting – which can include anything from omissions regarding defects with the property to inflated or fake rent rolls on a commercial property – you most likely want out of the deal, pure and simple. The same goes for a seller who was misled by a buyer who pulls out of a deal on the eve of closing after it becomes clear he lied about the financing.

 

But, while the end result was that you were misled about a real estate deal, what remedies you receive in court or settlement over your dispute can vary greatly on whether your attorney can prove that there was not only a misrepresentation but also that you were defrauded by the other party.

Punitive Damages are Available in a California Real Estate Fraud Case

In short, the key difference for the plaintiff who can successfully prove a real estate fraud case is that the party can receive punitive damages in addition to the other remedies available in a more straightforward misrepresentation case, in which the plaintiff is generally limited to winning the benefit of the bargain (which can include invalidating and unwinding the deal) and associated costs.

 

Thus, it is important to work with an experienced real estate litigation attorney who has the experience and skills to bring and win a real estate fraud action.

The Elements of Winning a CA Real Estate Fraud Case

To win a fraud action against another party in a real estate deal in California, it will be necessary for your attorney to prove by a preponderance of the evidence (meaning it is more than likely true) that the other party:

  • Made a material (meaning significant) misrepresentation relating to the property, and this misrepresentation can come in the form of a false representation, a concealment of information, or a failure to disclose;
  • The other party knew that a representation was false, or that an important fact was concealed or not disclosed;
  • The other party intended to defraud you by making the false representation, concealment, or nondisclosure (meaning the other party intended that you would go forward with the deal via his wrongful action);
  • You as the complaining party justifiably relied on the misrepresentation (or concealment/nondisclosure) in going forward with the deal; and
  • You suffered damages as a result.

 

While the misrepresentation, your reliance, and your damages may be relatively straightforward in some cases (which, by themselves, can potentially form the basis of a successful breach of contract action), proving that the other party knew the representation was false and that they intended to defraud can be challenging.

 

An experienced real estate litigation attorney, however, will rely on sophisticated investigative and discovery methods to identify and locate evidence relating to such intent, and aggressively seek out the highest financial recovery possible on your behalf.

Contact the Real Estate Litigation Attorneys at Wagenseller Law Firm

At Wagenseller Law Firm in downtown Los Angeles, we provide full legal services to individuals and businesses in business and real estate litigation matters. Contact Wagenseller Law Firm today to schedule a consultation to discuss your real estate matter.

Understanding Your Remedial Options in a California Real Estate Fraud Case

If you believe you have been a victim of real estate fraud, or if another party is threatening you with a claim of real estate fraud, your primary questions are most likely: 1) is there merit to the claim of real estate fraud?; and 2) if so, how will this end? This article takes a brief overview of the second question, with the answer being that a successful plaintiff in a real estate fraud lawsuit can pursue either money damages for their losses or rescission of the contract.

Pursuing Money Damages in a CA Real Estate Fraud Case

The central question for the plaintiff in a real estate fraud case is whether the plaintiff still wants the benefit of the transaction. Usually, this looks at the purchaser of the real estate, as it is more often going to be the case that a purchaser is later claiming there was some kind of fraud related to the true worth of the property.

If a purchaser can successfully show that there was fraud which induced the purchaser to go through with buying the property, but that purchaser still wants to remain on the property, the purchaser can pursue money damages equivalent to the difference between what they thought were receiving based on the fraudulent statements and the actual value of the property. For example, if a plaintiff believed the property was worth $900,000 based on fraudulent statements, but the true nature of the property is $600,000, the plaintiff could pursue money damages of $300,000 along with related costs.

Pursuing Rescission in a CA Real Estate Fraud Case

If the purchaser instead wants to completely unwind the real estate purchase transaction, the purchaser can do so through a legal remedy called rescission. This essentially means the contract will treated as though it was never valid, and the purpose will be to put the parties back in the same positions as which they started.

Thus, the purchaser will need to vacate the property, and the seller will need to refund the purchase price to the purchaser. The purchaser can also often pursue other financial damages related to going through with the contract, such as the cost of real estate agents, escrow services, and moving expenses.

Work With an Experienced Los Angeles Real Estate Litigation Attorney

Attorney Laine T. Wagenseller of Wagenseller Law Firm has published numerous articles on real estate law and works with individuals and businesses across Southern California in resolving real estate matters, including complex real estate fraud lawsuits. Contact Wagenseller Law Firm today to schedule a consultation in order to evaluate your situation and begin working towards a positive resolution.

3 Ways Commercial Landlords Can Avoid Misrepresentation/Fraud Claims

When a business goes bust, or at the very least hits hard times, it is the commercial landlord that leased space to that business that often stands to lose in the form of missed rent payments and attempts to duck out on the lease altogether. Matters can get worse when the failing business tenant turns its wrath toward the landlord itself as the source of the business’ misfortunes.

It is not uncommon for business tenants to sue their commercial landlords on claims of misrepresentation and/or fraud relating to issues such as: the number of customers coming through a given area; the identity of other tenants in a common retail space; whether there will be exclusive use by a party (e.g. a coffee shop getting promises the landlord will not rent to other coffee shops); who has the responsibility to make repairs; or issues about other amenities or services.

A misrepresentation or fraud claim may seem totally without merit to you, the landlord, but it can cause major headaches and legal fees if the tenant is able to provide substantial basis for the claims. Here are three ways you can work to avoid future misrepresentation and fraud claims from commercial tenants.

Avoid Making Promises Not Included in the Lease

Potential business tenants of course frequently have numerous questions about the space they are considering renting, and commercial landlords want to give assurances for their potential tenants’ concerns, especially when the landlords take pride in maintaining and building those properties.

But giving a potential tenant your perspective on their ability to thrive in a given space can come back to haunt you when the tenant claims they were fraudulently induced to enter into the lease based on oral statements you made, even when you thought those statements were merely opinion or friendly predictions as opposed to contractual guarantees.

Thus, you should avoid making statements which could come off promises or guarantees which a tenant could later say was a fraudulent inducement.  

Get all Material Terms in Your Lease Agreement (With an Integration Clause)…

Of course, you as the commercial landlord will want to make guarantees on terms of the contract, such as rent, duration, repairs, maintenance, common areas, and so on. And, if you do want to make further guarantees as a condition of commanding higher rent (i.e. an exclusive use provision), your tenant will certainly want to see that in the lease.

You should thus work with your attorney to include all material terms in the lease agreement, but also include an integration clause which makes it clear that all material terms of the agreement are indeed included in the lease, and that there are no other outside oral promises which contradict or otherwise alter the lease provisions.

With this signed provision in hand, your tenant will have a more difficult time later saying you made misrepresentations outside of the contract which could form the basis for a fraud claim.

…But Realize a Contract is Not a Shield For Fraud

All that said, a well-drafted commercial lease agreement with an integration clause will not act as a shield for fraudulent activity by the landlord to induce tenants to sign a lease. Courts will look beyond what is in the commercial lease agreement to determine whether a landlord did indeed take advantage of a tenant by making incorrect statements or withholding valuable information.

Certainly, an integration clause will help in avoiding such claims but understand that it is not a license to act unethically and courts will look beyond it when egregious behavior occurs.

Work With an Experienced Los Angeles Real Estate Litigation Attorney

Attorney Laine T. Wagenseller of Wagenseller Law Firm has published numerous articles on real estate law and works with individuals and businesses across Southern California in resolving real estate matters, including disputes arising from commercial leases. Contact Wagenseller Law Firm today to schedule a consultation in order to evaluate your situation and begin working towards a positive resolution.

Do I Need to Go to Court to Win Partition of Co-owned Property?

Because real estate is often so expensive, and because real estate parcels are regularly gifted to or inherited by multiple parties, it is not uncommon for real estate to be jointly owned by two or more parties as tenants in common. And, given the shifting financial and geographical goals and needs of different individuals, it is also not uncommon for there to come a time when at least one of those parties wants to change this arrangement of co-owning the entirety of the property.

It could be that one party wants one portion of the property solely to himself or herself without the difficulties of co-ownership, but in most cases the situation is that one party either needs or the funds corresponding with his or her ownership interest in the property, or simply does not want the hassle or obligation of co-ownership of a property that may be thousands of miles away from his or her current residence. In such cases, partition is the appropriate legal remedy for these parties. And while working with an experienced real estate attorney to negotiate and execute the partition is highly recommended, it may not be necessary to go to court to win the results associated with a partition lawsuit.

What a Partition Lawsuit Entails

In a partition lawsuit, one party must go to court and request that a judge issue an interlocutory judgment which officially orders that partition should occur. Most co-owners have a right to partition (unless the right has been waived), and thus the interlocutory judgment in and of itself is not difficult to obtain.

What comes next, however, is more complicated and costly. If the person seeking partition wants to divide the land, the court must appoint a referee to oversee the process to ensure that it is done fairly in light of the co-owners’ proportionate interests. This can involve lengthy battles over the relative values of portions of the property (with the referee charging expensive hourly fees in addition to the attorney fees associated with litigation).

If the person seeking partition, however, is seeking a sale of the property and division of the proceeds, this can be relatively easier, as it is easier to fairly divide dollars and cents than property, but will still involve the process of a court-overseen auction process.

Reaching the Goals of Partition Without a Lawsuit

If both parties are reasonable and willing to work with each other, the results of a partition lawsuit can be reached without litigation. Much in the same way family law attorneys might reach a settlement divorce agreement outside of court in light of state divorce law, a real estate attorney can negotiate a partition agreement outside of court based on the principles and rights the parties have under state law.

When both parties are fully made aware of the likely outcomes of a partition lawsuit – and keeping in mind that in most cases partition is a right that is not in question – they can proceed towards a mutually beneficial outcome without incurring the added costs associated with a complex partition lawsuit.

Contact the Real Estate Litigation Attorneys at Wagenseller Law Firm

At Wagenseller Law Firm in downtown Los Angeles, we provide full legal services to individuals and businesses in business and real estate litigation matters. Contact Wagenseller Law Firm today to schedule a consultation to discuss your real estate matter.

What are My Remedies When a Real Estate Deal Falls Through?

Few types of investments can carry more financial risks, consequences, and potential pitfalls than a large-scale (or even small-scale for that matter) real estate deal. Whether you are acting as an investor, outright purchaser, or seller in a real estate deal, you have the potential for high returns, but you also face much more room for complex and unintended issues than when investing in, say, stock or debt-based investments in a Fortune 500 company. Oftentimes, litigation – or at least the threat of litigation – is necessary for achieving your intended outcome when a real estate deal goes south. Contact an experienced real estate attorney to discuss your options and likelihoods of success for your particular challenge, but below are the basic types of remedies you can pursue when another party breaches his duties or obligations on a real estate deal.  

Specific Performance

Specific performance is an equitable remedy by which a court requires that another party to a contract follows through on his or her obligations pursuant to the contract. Specific performance is not available as a remedy on most contracts, but the law views real estate purchases differently. Because every piece of real estate is unique, a court may honor the rights of either the intended buyer or the seller under a real estate contract by requiring that the party attempting to skip out on the deal follow through with its obligations under the real estate transaction.  

Money Damages

As an alternative remedy to specific performance, a party who has breached on his or her obligations under a real estate contract – which could include anything from failing to go through with the transaction to making representations about the property or financing which turn out to be false – may be required to pay money damages to the non-breaching party which provide that party with the financial benefit they would have received had the deal gone through as intended and represented in the contract.

Partition

Another option that a court has in resolving a real estate transaction or transfer is partition, which means to divide the property between the parties in conflict. This is more likely to come into play when the property consists of multiple buildings and/or units, or contains a large plot of land. The court can also order partition with regard to proceeds arising from use of the land such as rent or resource extraction. Typically, this remedy is applicable when there is a dispute among multiple owners/claimants of a previously undivided piece of property.

Resulting Trust

A resulting trust is a remedy that a court can award when an investor has devoted funds towards the purchase of a property but has not been placed on the title of the property. A resulting trust means that the court will consider the owner who is on the title to be holding the property wholly or partially in benefit of the investor who is not on the title.

Contact the Real Estate Litigation Attorneys at Wagenseller Law Firm

At Wagenseller Law Firm in downtown Los Angeles, we provide full legal services to individuals and businesses in business and real estate litigation matters. Contact Wagenseller Law Firm today to schedule a consultation to discuss your real estate matter.

Responding to a Specific Performance Demand in a CA Real Estate Deal

Whether you are a purchaser or seller in a residential or commercial property deal, there may come a point in time before closing when you decide you no longer want to go through with the deal. There could be any number of reasons for this: concern over rising or falling property values; another real estate option that popped up; a lost revenue source; or even a personal attachment to the property itself. You always have the option of asking the other party to consider renegotiating the sale agreement, and, if both of you agree to do so then you are free to do that. But, under California law, the other party does have the right to demand specific performance, and you are advised to work with a real estate litigation attorney in response to such a demand.

Specific Performance in California Real Estate

For the uninitiated, specific performance is a judicial remedy by which a court orders that one party in a contract go through with its obligations under the contract, i.e. sell the property to the party requesting specific performance or, in other cases, follow through with the purchase of the property.

In most contractual matters, courts are reluctant to order specific performance on the principle that parties should be free to do what they please without the government forcing them to do something. In such cases, money damages are usually paid by the breaching party to the non-breaching party to account for the losses the non-breaching party suffers.

The courts view real estate deals differently, as every piece of real estate is, by definition, unique. Thus, when a party contracts to buy a certain piece of real estate, money damages would be insufficient to cover the breach of not selling that piece of real estate. Courts will enforce specific performance against both breaching buyers and sellers in real estate deals.

Work With an Attorney to Respond to a Specific Performance Demand

If your only grounds for not wanting to go through with either purchasing or selling the property are that you have changed your mind based on some factor that has nothing to do with the other party’s actions thus far, you may not have a great case for opposing a specific performance demand.

That said, if there are obligations pursuant to the land sale contract that the other party has failed to follow through with – or if there are significant inaccuracies or questions about the validity of certain representations made to you – then you may be able to defeat a demand for specific performance.

A real estate litigation attorney can examine your circumstances to determine whether such grounds may exist. An attorney can also negotiate on your behalf with the other party in pursuit of alternative resolutions to the matter short of your going through with the transaction.

Contact the Real Estate Attorneys at Wagenseller Law Firm

At Wagenseller Law Firm in downtown Los Angeles, we provide full legal services to individuals and businesses in business and real estate litigation matters. Contact the Wagenseller Law Firm today to schedule a consultation to discuss your real estate matter.

A CA Commercial Tenant’s Options When Receiving a Pay or Quit Notice

In California, a commercial landlord has the ability to demand that rent be paid on the first day of the month, or the first day of any other periodic term as set forth in the lease. Although leases may allow for a grace period, such as allowing tenants to pay within three or five days of the first day of the month, there is no state law that demands such a grace period be included in a lease agreement. As soon as a commercial tenant misses making a rent payment – which can be the end of the first day of the month if there is no grace period – the landlord can begin the process of eviction of that tenant. The first step in an eviction (or unlawful detainer) process is to present the commercial tenant with what is commonly called a “pay or quit notice.” The commercial tenant has several options at that point.

What a Pay or Quit Notice Is

Although California state law does not use the phrase “pay or quit notice,” the notice is required under the law to begin the process of an eviction. A landlord can choose to give a tenant a pay or quit notice as soon as possible after the rent goes unpaid (again, the 2nd day of the month where there is no grace period).

The pay or quit notice is a demand from the tenant to pay the rent due within three days or else face eviction proceedings. The notice should include the following information:

  • the amount of rent which is due
  • the name, telephone number, and address of the person to whom the rent payment shall be made, and
  • if payment may be made personally, the usual days and hours that person will be available to receive the payment

The notice can be served on the commercial tenant 1) personally, 2) by leaving it with a person of suitable age and discretion at the commercial property and then also mailing a copy to the tenant, or 3) if no suitable person can be found, then by affixing a copy in a conspicuous place on the property, and also sending a copy through the mail addressed to the tenant.

What a Commercial Tenant Can Do Upon Receiving the Notice

If you as a commercial tenant receive a pay or quit notice, there is little time to delay in responding.

Your first option is to simply pay the amount due to the landlord per the terms of the notice. If you pay the rent due within three days of receiving the notice, then your landlord will not be able to pursue an unlawful detainer (eviction) proceeding against you.

If you either cannot pay rent or are unwilling to pay rent, you also have the option of avoiding an eviction lawsuit by vacating the property within the three days (the “quit” option), and returning your keys to the landlord. The landlord will still have the option of pursuing the rent owed on the property, as well as future rent payments still covered by the lease, but at least an eviction proceeding on your record can be avoided.

Finally, you can stay on the property and not pay the rent, but the landlord will be able to proceed with an eviction action as soon as the three-day period is up. If the eviction action is successful, the landlord can retake the property and still have the right to pursue you for any rent payments due under the lease.

If you believe the commercial landlord has not fulfilled its obligations under the lease, and that is the reason you are withholding rent, you run a high risk of an eviction by not paying the rent due. Once an eviction proceeding starts, you will not have the ability to avoid the eviction proceeding by paying the rent due. There are other legal strategies to pursue in attempting to compel a landlord to comply with the terms of the lease, and you are advised to work with a real estate litigation attorney to pursue those options.

Contact the Real Estate Attorneys at Wagenseller Law Firm

At Wagenseller Law Firm in downtown Los Angeles, we provide full legal services to individuals and businesses in business and real estate litigation matters. Contact the Wagenseller Law Firm today to schedule a consultation to discuss your real estate matter.