Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
San Francisco County Super. Ct. No. 444594
The opinion filed herein on December 17, 2007, is ordered modified as follows:
On page 4, the third and final full paragraph on the page should read:
Plaintiff submitted a written statement, signed by her attorney, objecting to the extension. She complained of the improper requests to vacate and stated it was defendants who had caused the unnecessary delay because the tenants in the other four units “were not served properly with 60-day notices in the first place.” Plaintiff also asserted that defendants knew or should have known in November 2004—up to six months before the other tenants were served with the 60-day notice—about the need for access to the unit above hers to accomplish the repairs. Plaintiff requested that the petition be denied or that defendants be penalized for the extension.
No change in the judgment.