Senseman v. Mimi Real Properties CA4/1

── Senseman v. Mimi Real Properties CA4/1 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: April 24, 2026 Category: General Filed 4/24/26 Senseman v. Mimi Real Properties CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA MARK A. SENSEMAN et al., D084658 Plaintiffs and Respondents, (Super. Ct. No. 27-2021- 00003304-CU-OR-CTL) v. MIMI REAL PROPERTIES, LLC et al., ORDER MODIFIYING OPINION, DENYING Defendants and Appellants. REHEARING AND DENYING REQUEST FOR PUBLICATION NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT THE COURT: It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on March 26, 2026, be modified as follows: 1. On page 2, in the second sentence of the first paragraph, both instances of the name “Phyliss” are deleted and replaced with “Phyllis.” 2. On page 2, the second paragraph beginning with “The Sensemans sued the Joneses,” is deleted and replaced with the following paragraph:  The Sensemans sued the Joneses after the Joneses began using their unit as a short-term rental. Before trial, the court ruled in favor of the Joneses on one of the Sensemans’ claims for nuisance and dismissed it. The jury then found in favor of the Sensemans on the remaining claim for nuisance and on their claims for breach of the homeowner association’s covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs). The trial court entered a permanent injunction directing the Joneses to take measures to abate excessive noise caused by frequent rental turnover. 3. On page 3, in the last sentence of the third paragraph, the words “shorter term” are deleted and replaced with “shorter-term.” 4. On page 4, in the fifth sentence of the first full paragraph, the name “Phyliss” is deleted and replaced with “Phyllis.” 5. On page 5, section II of the PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND of the opinion, titled “Lawsuit and Jury Trial,” this entire section is deleted and replaced with the following, to include new footnotes 1 and 2, which will require renumbering of all subsequent footnotes: II. Lawsuit and Jury Trial In January 2021, the Sensemans sued the Joneses.1 The verified complaint asserted “cause[s] of action” for breach of the HOA’s CC&Rs, nuisance, and “declaratory and injunctive relief.” (Capitalization omitted.) The complaint divided the nuisance “[c]ause of [a]ction” into two “[c]ount[s].”2 1 The complaint listed Five Star Vacation Rentals as an additional defendant. Five Star Vacation Rentals was used as a DBA by the Joneses, but did not exist as a separate entity. 2 The meaning of “ ‘cause of action’ ” and “ ‘count’ ” depends on context and can be unclear. (Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.5th 376, 395 [cause of action]; Slater v. Blackwood (1975) 15 Cal.3d