Caption: Tran v. Gasio, Orange County Superior Court Case Number 30-2024-01410991-CL-UD-CJC. Unlawful detainer, limited civil. Department C61. Commissioner Carmen D. Snuggs-Spraggins. Filed July 3, 2024. Tried January 27, 2025. Under Submission Ruling March 27, 2025, Document ID 74522578.

Plaintiff: Phat L.K. Tran. Owner of 19235 Brynn Court, Huntington Beach 92648, since 2005. Practicing dentist. Property network value reportedly exceeding eleven million dollars. Counsel of record: Steven D. Silverstein, California State Bar number 86466, admitted May 31, 1979. Disambiguation: not Steven A. Silverstein, California State Bar 130763, of Silverstein and Huston. These are different attorneys.

Defendants: Michael A. Gasio and Yulia S. Gasio. Tenants of the subject premises from May 1, 2022 to August 5, 2024. Pro se from January 21, 2025 (Substitution of Attorney served by certified mail). Prior defense counsel Richard Rosiak, California State Bar 141430, withdrew by letter arriving in defendants’ mailbox Friday January 10, 2025 — the first business day before trial set Monday January 13. The Rosiak withdrawal is under formal review by the California State Bar Enforcement Division, Examiner Devin Urbany. No finding has been made.

Lease executed April 26, 2024. Authentisign envelope 46CC8725. The Authentisign was transmitted Thursday April 25, 2024 at 8:57 PM. The family signed Saturday April 27 under a weekend ultimatum from the landlord and broker: sign by Monday or eviction begins. Prior lease expired May 1, 2024. Procedural unconscionability per OTO, L.L.C. v. Kho, 8 Cal.5th 111 (2019).

Rent: five thousand three hundred fifty dollars per month. Directed by the executed lease to Wells Fargo account number 3312943297 — the broker’s personal Wells Fargo account. Not a brokerage trust account. Business and Professions Code section 10145, subdivision (a), trust-fund duty attaches at the broker license level and is not transferred to the corporate broker.

Deposit structure per the April 26 lease (Authentisign 46CC8725, carrying forward the April 23, 2022 Document B framework): five thousand security, three hundred seventy-five keys-and-openers, one thousand pet deposit. Total: six thousand three hundred seventy-five. Exceeds one month’s rent. The one thousand pet deposit was paid to owner directly — pre-signing, before the broker received the executed lease into trust. Section 10145 routing question on the face of the move-in cost sheet.

Pre-April 2024 listing agent: Anna Tran Ly, California Department of Real Estate Broker number 01894348, issued January 28, 2011. Individual licensee — no DBA, no branch, no corporation. The “Sun Realty and Management” DBA expired February 24, 2015. Daughter of plaintiff Phat L.K. Tran. Twice the listing agent for 19235 Brynn Court before this matter; both prior tenancies she brokered ended in eviction.

April 26, 2024 substitute agent on the new lease: Hanson Tri Le, DRE Broker number 01358448, issued at broker level March 23, 2006. Currently attaches as Broker Associate under Stratton-LFCA Inc., the corporate broker brand Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices California Properties. The April 2024 swap from Anna Ly to Hanson Le was an internal family decision — Anna refused to apply the rent raise — not an arm’s-length brokerage change.

Le quit BHHS on May 13, 2024 — seventeen days before the cure tender was delivered on May 30, 2024. Le held no BHHS brokerage authority at the time of delivery. Le took the Fifth Amendment when interviewed by Huntington Beach Police Department on this matter.

Three-Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit, dated June 21, 2024. Unsigned — typed name only, “PHAT L.K. TRAN.” Demanded five thousand three hundred fifty dollars for June 2024. Directed payment to Wells Fargo account number 1005959166 — a different account from the one specified in the executed lease (account 3312943297). Served on Michael Gasio only; two additional named tenants were not served. Code of Civil Procedure sections 1161 and 1162 — dual defect.

Cure tender: Wells Fargo cashier’s check number 0084411044, dated May 28, 2024. Amount four thousand three hundred thirty-eight dollars and forty-eight cents. Payable to Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices. The arithmetic: five thousand three hundred fifty minus one thousand eleven dollars and fifty-two cents — the Home Depot dishwasher purchase of May 15, 2024 — equals four thousand three hundred thirty-eight dollars and forty-eight cents. Civil Code section 1942 repair-and-deduct.

USPS tracking 9534914882764149935944. Delivered May 30, 2024. Signed for “H H” at BHHS. The check remains sealed and uncashed; held by plaintiff. The Court’s March 27, 2025 Under Submission Ruling, Document ID 74522578, expressly acknowledges this tender.

The day after notice service — Saturday, June 22, 2024 — the landlord sent plaintiff a text message admitting in writing he did not know rent had been paid to the broker’s account, was confused by the contract, and had caused the notice to be sent based on the broker’s false report. The admission occurred during the statutory cure window. The unlawful detainer was filed twelve days later on July 3, 2024. The complaint did not disclose the June 22 admission to the Court.

June 28, 2024 — one week after the Three-Day Notice, three days after Branch Manager Sandoval at BHHS California Properties was placed on direct text notice by plaintiff at her published number, five days before the unlawful detainer was filed — plaintiff transmitted by Wells Fargo wire transfer five thousand three hundred fifty dollars to Phat Tran’s Wells Fargo account 1005959166. Memo line: “Unknown Contract for July payment 27 of 37 on contracts.”

The June 28 wire was the duplicate July 2024 rent. Paid under protest into the account designated on the defective notice rather than the account designated on the executed lease. The plaintiff’s house had been on direct notice of the cure tender to BHHS since May 30. The landlord proceeded with the unlawful detainer five days later notwithstanding the wire receipt and the cure tender.

Trial January 27, 2025. Department C61 employs no in-court reporter for limited civil unlawful detainer matters. The verbatim trial record is therefore not produced as a routine artifact. The operative channel is the electronic-audio request under Code of Civil Procedure section 1161.2, subdivision (a)(1)(A), requiring a separate court-reporter or court-audio order from Department C61. As of this brief, the Gasio trial verbatim audio has not been obtained.

Contemporaneous record preserved by sworn declaration of Michael A. Gasio executed April 29, 2026 under Code of Civil Procedure section 2015.5. The declaration sets out the events of the January 27, 2025 trial date in their contemporaneous detail and is preserved in the case-file Google Docs repository.

The Court’s March 27, 2025 Under Submission Ruling, Document ID 74522578, expressly acknowledges the cashier’s check tender at Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices. The acknowledgment is in the Court’s operative language. The instrument referenced in defense counsel’s confirmed final question on cross — “Did you cash the check?” answered “No” — was the July 2024 rent refund instrument the landlord asserted at trial he had mailed. No USPS proof of service of that instrument was produced.

Between March 27 and April 22, 2025, the defendant received from opposing counsel by United States certified mail a document titled (PROPOSED) AMENDED JUDGMENT. Drafted on the letterhead of Steven D. Silverstein. Captioned in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Orange, Central Justice Center. Recited the case number, named the commissioner. Findings: judgment four thousand three hundred twenty-five; attorney’s fees five hundred; court costs five hundred; total five thousand three hundred twenty-five.

Date line blank. Judge’s signature line blank. The document was not signed by any judge of the Superior Court of California. The word “(PROPOSED)” appears in parentheses in the title as the sole textual marker that the document had not been signed by the Court. Transmitted by certified mail by counsel of record to a pro se defendant.

Statutory framework: 15 USC 1692e(9) (FDCPA — simulated court document); Civil Code section 1788 et seq. (Rosenthal); Penal Code section 115 (false instrument); Business and Professions Code section 6128, subdivision (a) (attorney deceit toward party — civil treble damages); Rule of Professional Conduct 4.1. Heintz v. Jenkins, 514 US 291 (1995), confirms FDCPA application to attorneys collecting on consumer debts.

Response: April 22, 2025, plaintiff issued Wells Fargo cashier’s check number 0084412016 in the amount of five thousand three hundred thirty-eight dollars and forty-eight cents. Joint payees: PHAT K. TRAN AND STEVEN D. SILVERSTEIN. Memo: “DUPLICATE JUL 24 RENT/PAID UNDER PROTEST.” UPS Express tracking 1Z6017R6803685099A1. Rule of Professional Conduct 1.15 (safekeeping funds in which others claim interest).

Move-Out Clearance Report, DocuSign envelope F5D247C2-A1A9-4991-B91F-6A333347A87D, dated August 5, 2024. Signatory: Anna Tran Ly, Broker, DRE 01894348. Executed seventeen months after her written termination of agency dated March 18, 2023 (“I no longer work for Phat Tran, call him directly”).

Two thousand five dollars deducted from the security deposit on a pre-printed line marked “Attorney Fees” — before any court adjudication. Civil Code section 1950.5, subdivisions (b) and (l), excludes attorney fees from permitted security-deposit deductions. Unlawful on the face of the form. Additionally relevant: Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5, subdivision (a)(10), and section 1717 (contractual fee provisions and court determination).

Ly Construction Invoice 2412, dated August 14, 2024. Seven thousand eight hundred thirty-seven dollars for vinyl flooring — not carpet. CSLB number 1068334. Named contractor: David Ly. Nine days after the City of Huntington Beach inspector cleared the premises on July 27, 2024 with no pet damage. Eighteen-day prefill window between clearance and invoice. Two-dollar discrepancy between the clearance-report figure and the invoice figure confirms the invoice was prefilled.

Move-in May 1, 2022, eleven thirty-nine AM. iOS-geotagged photograph documents established black mold colonies in the under-sink kitchen cabinet. Decade-long wall leak from an unpermitted drain relocation approximately 2012. Plaintiff in the unlawful detainer had held the property since 2005 — the entire moisture-accumulation period.

Day six — May 6, 2022 — listing agent Anna Tran Ly text to tenants: “I know it was just finished construction.” Defective electrical at the dishwasher outlet; dishwasher found full of water on first use. Four contractor visits by David Ly, Ly Construction CSLB 1068334. On opening the wall: jumped circuits; doubled conductors; characteristics of unpermitted electrical work. On visit four, Ly directed plaintiff — age seventy-two — to turn off the breaker and replace the switches himself from Home Depot rather than arrange licensed remediation.

Roof leak in the bedroom above the garage. Oval tide-mark stain — recurring moisture pattern. Ly verbally said the property needed a whole new roof, then applied touch-up paint to the ceiling stain. No roof work performed for the remaining approximately seven hundred days of the tenancy.

Mid-tenancy: landlord stopped paying for the contracted gardener service. The homeowners’ association handed plaintiff a push mower and delegated yard maintenance directly to the tenant. The same HOA holds documentary evidence that plaintiff in the unlawful detainer was approximately one year in arrears on HOA dues. Financial pressure as the motive context.

Statutory framework: Civil Code sections 1941.1, 1942, 1942.5, 1710, 1102; Health and Safety Code section 17920.3; Business and Professions Code sections 10176, 7090.

Approximately three years before this matter, on behalf of the same client at the same single-family residence at 19235 Brynn Court, the same plaintiff’s counsel prosecuted an unlawful detainer that resulted in the eviction of the prior tenant. Case: Harman v. Tran. Certified court filings ROA numbers 2, 5, and 34 obtained April 24, 2026 from the OC Superior Court Records Center. Purchase confirmation 01373P.

The prior tenant’s rent at the time of her eviction was approximately three thousand six hundred dollars per month. The Gasios moved in approximately thirty days later, May 1, 2022, at five thousand dollars per month. Twenty-six months later, the same counsel for the same client prosecuted the unlawful detainer that resulted in the Gasios’ eviction. The property was then converted to short-term Airbnb operation at approximately seven thousand seven hundred eighty-six dollars per month base rate.

Two unlawful detainers, twenty-six months apart, same client, same single-family residence, each followed by a substantial rent increase to the next occupant. The pattern of practice is documented from the address record alone. Huntington Beach Municipal Code chapter 230.15 governs short-term rental at the property; no documented STR permit on file.

October 2025: a different Phat Tran property — 20012 Sand Dune Lane, valued approximately three million four hundred thousand dollars — was transferred to Smart Invest HB LLC, a Delaware entity with California filing B20250360378. Civil Code section 3439.04 badges of fraudulent transfer framework. Identified for pattern context only.

California Penal Code: section 115 (false instrument); section 132 (offering false evidence); section 134 (preparing false evidence); section 127 (subornation of perjury); section 31 (aiding and abetting); section 182 (conspiracy); section 470 (forgery framework on instrument alteration).

California Business and Professions Code: section 6128, subdivision (a) (attorney deceit toward tribunal or party — misdemeanor plus civil treble damages); section 6068, subdivision (d) (duty of attorney candor to court); section 10145, subdivision (a) (broker trust-fund duty); section 10176 (real estate licensee misrepresentation); section 17200 et seq. (unfair business practices); section 17910, 17918, 17900(a)(1) (fictitious business name compliance).

California Rules of Professional Conduct: 1.0.1(f) (knowledge definition); 1.4 (duty to consult client); 1.5(a) (unconscionable or illegal fee); 1.15 (safekeeping funds in which others claim interest); 3.1 (meritorious claims); 3.3, subdivisions (a)(1) and (a)(3) (candor toward tribunal); 3.4(a) (fairness to opposing party); 4.1 (truthfulness in statements to others); 7.1 (false or misleading communications about lawyer’s services); 8.4(c) (dishonesty, fraud, deceit, reckless or intentional misrepresentation).

California Civil Code: section 1102 (transfer disclosure); section 1710 (fraudulent nondisclosure); section 1717 and Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5 (attorney’s fees framework); section 1788 et seq. (Rosenthal); section 1941.1 and Health and Safety Code section 17920.3 (habitability); section 1942 (repair and deduct); section 1942.5 (retaliatory eviction); section 1950.5, subdivisions (b) and (l) (security-deposit framework, excluded categories, itemization); section 3439.04 (UVTA badges).

Code of Civil Procedure: section 128.7 (sanctions); section 473 (relief from judgment); section 1161 and 1162 (UD notice content and service); section 1161.2, subdivision (a)(1)(A) (electronic-audio access channel); section 1167.1 (UD file sealing); section 1179 (relief from forfeiture); section 2015.5 (sworn declarations).

Federal: 15 USC 1692e, 1692f, 1692g (FDCPA — false or misleading representations, unfair practices, validation duty); 15 USC 5481 (CFPB jurisdictional framework); 18 USC 1341 (mail fraud); 18 USC 1343 (wire fraud); 42 USC 3604 and 3617 (Fair Housing Act — discrimination and interference).

Doctrinal anchors. Strict-compliance cluster in unlawful detainer notice: Stancil v. Superior Court, 11 Cal.5th 381, 394–395 (2021); the Williams / Horowitz / Giovanazzi line in security-deposit and notice strict-compliance practice. Fraud on the court: Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 US 238 (1944). Procedural unconscionability in adhesion contracts: OTO, L.L.C. v. Kho, 8 Cal.5th 111 (2019). Stipulated vacatur disfavored: U.S. Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall Partnership, 513 US 18 (1994). FDCPA attorney application: Heintz v. Jenkins, 514 US 291 (1995). Willful blindness: Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., 563 US 754, 769 (2011).

Parallel state-court appellate record bearing on same counsel: Attenello v. Basilious, OC Superior Court Appellate Division 30-2021-01217998, opinion filed September 20, 2022. Demurrer sustained without leave to amend on Civil Code section 1946.2(b)(1)(K) strict-compliance pleading defect; affirmed on appeal. Plaintiff represented by Steven D. Silverstein on the appeal. Cited for the existence of a surviving public adjudicated finding only.

Federal docket of record: Bea-Mone III v. Silverstein Attorney at Law, US District Court Central District of California, case 8:17-cv-00550. November 16, 2018 federal jury Special Verdict in an action sounding in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Final Judgment one thousand dollars entered November 30, 2018. On October 9, 2019, the Ninth Circuit granted Silverstein’s own motion to dismiss the appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b). Six days later, October 15, 2019, a stipulation in the district court set aside the November 30, 2018 judgment and dismissed the case with prejudice. No surviving public adjudication of liability remains. Cited for docket existence only, and for the Bancorp stipulated-vacatur framework above.

Parallel civil fraud docket on the same individual whose post-tenancy accounting is at issue in this matter: Andrew V. Huynh v. Anh Andy Quang Tran; Anna Ly, OC Superior Court 30-2025-01502635-CU-FR-CJC. Case type: FRAUD. Filed August 8, 2025. Anna Ly defendant and cross-complainant. Hearings on Demurrer to Complaint and Motion to Strike Portions of Complaint set April 30, 2026, Department C10, Judge Nelson. Cited for the existence of an active public civil fraud docket only. No finding of liability has been made.

Earlier docket with the same plaintiff’s counsel in this case’s family: Tran v. Bach, 2018 OC Superior Court. The form-use pattern in that prior matter parallels the Move-Out Clearance Report form template at issue here. Cited for documentary parallel.

Orange County District Attorney, Real Estate Fraud Unit. Resubmission letter mailed to Honorable Todd Spitzer on Monday May 11, 2026 by USPS certified mail, tracking number 9589 0710 5270 3530 1127 14. Status: pending resubmission, neutral-tone framing. Merits not addressed. DA engaged.

California State Bar, Office of Chief Trial Counsel. Bar number 86466 file open on the Silverstein conduct framework. State Bar contact window noted. Supplemental letter for Examiner Devin Urbany prepared on the Silverstein file. No finding has been made.

California Department of Real Estate. DRE Matter number 1-24-0513-010 (Anna Tran Ly, Broker, DRE 01894348). DRE Pre-Complaint number 1-26-0304-002 (Hanson Tri Le, Broker, DRE 01358448; Investigator Graciela F. Macias; SSI Jerusha White). No finding has been made.

Huntington Beach Police Department. Internal Affairs file AI 26-0003, Sergeant Trent Tunstall badge 1178, closed “Unfounded” February 18, 2026. Demand letter to Chief Eric Parra bypassing Tunstall on the disposition record. Eleven-agency packet mailed April 25, 2026.

Federal channels. FBI Los Angeles Field Office, Special Agent H. Nguyen, hnguyen2@fbi.gov, active submission. USPS Postal Inspection Service, mail-fraud framing under 18 USC 1341. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Inspector General. United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Housing, Fair Housing Act sections 3604 and 3617 framing addressing the senior, limited-English-proficient resident named on the executed lease, Tetyana Zvyagintseva. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 15 USC 5481 framing addressing eighteen documented Wells Fargo wire transfers routed through a personal account in connection with a residential tenancy. Status pending across the federal docket.

Fair Housing Council submission completed. Anchor: Tetyana Zvyagintseva, named lessee, limited English proficiency.

What the record asks. A documentary record of a residential unlawful detainer in which the predicate notice was defective on its face; the cure was tendered, delivered, and acknowledged by the Court; the off-contract demand was wired five days before the complaint was filed; the post-judgment instrument bore the title (PROPOSED) AMENDED JUDGMENT with a blank judge’s signature line; the move-out instruments included an attorney-fees deduction excluded by Civil Code section 1950.5(b) and an invoice prefilled nine days after the city inspector cleared the premises; the property is the subject of a documented two-eviction pattern under the same counsel over twenty-six months; and the regulatory pipeline is engaged across the OC District Attorney, the State Bar, the Department of Real Estate, the police department, and four federal agencies.

What the record does not yet have. The verbatim trial transcript from Department C61. Production requires the separate court-reporter order through the Code of Civil Procedure section 1161.2(a)(1)(A) electronic-audio channel. The full long-form treatment of every reference in this short brief is found at The Audio Brief — A Narrated Documentary Record.

The publisher is a pro se litigant. The publisher is not an attorney. No criminal indictment has been returned. No State Bar disciplinary finding has been made. All characterizations are allegation framing for review by prosecutorial, regulatory, and disciplinary authorities. End of shorthand brief.