Court Record
The unlawful detainer action filed July 3, 2024 in the Orange County Superior Court, Central Justice Center — its procedural history, the March 27, 2025 Under Submission Ruling, and the post-judgment cashier’s check tendered under protest.
This section documents the proceedings in Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2024-01410991-CL-UD-CJC. It presents the case caption, the filing sequence, the trial court’s March 27, 2025 Minute Order in its operative language, the exhibits admitted and excluded by the Court, and the post-judgment payment tendered by the plaintiffs under protest.
The unlawful detainer was an expedited summary proceeding decided without full discovery or evidentiary record. The primary documents identified throughout this case file were not placed fully before the court in the procedural posture that allows for thorough examination of broker conduct, account designations, contract fraud, and related questions.
Case caption
Yulia S. Gasio
Silverstein Eviction Law
Procedural posture
June 21, 2024 — Three-Day Notice served
The Three-Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit was served on June 21, 2024, demanding $5,350.00 for the period June 1, 2024 to June 30, 2024. The notice bore the typed name “PHAT L.K. TRAN” with no handwritten signature. It directed payment to Wells Fargo account #1005959166 at a specific Wells Fargo branch — an account distinct from the payment account specified in the executed lease. See Section 3 for full analysis of the notice.
July 3, 2024 — Unlawful Detainer complaint filed
Twelve days after the Three-Day Notice was served, plaintiff Phat Tran filed an unlawful detainer complaint in the Orange County Superior Court, Central Justice Center. Case No. 30-2024-01410991-CL-UD-CJC. Counsel of record for plaintiff: Steven D. Silverstein, Esq.
The action was assigned to Department C61, Commissioner Carmen D. Snuggs-Spraggins.
August 5, 2024 — Defendants vacated the premises
Defendants vacated the property on August 5, 2024. The Move Out Clearance Report (DocuSign Envelope F5D247C2-A1A9-4991-B91F-6A333347A87D) records original move-in date 05/01/2022, rent paid through 05/01/2024, and vacate date 08/05/2024.
February 25, 2025 — Matter taken under submission
After a hearing on the merits, the matter was taken under submission on February 25, 2025. The Court considered written and oral arguments and evidence presented by both parties.
March 27, 2025 — Under Submission Ruling issued
Commissioner Carmen D. Snuggs-Spraggins, Department C61, issued an Under Submission Ruling dated March 27, 2025. Event ID / Document ID: 74522578.
The Ruling’s operative findings and exhibit treatment are set out below.
The March 27, 2025 Minute Order — operative language
The Court’s findings include, verbatim:
The Court’s acknowledgment of the cashier’s check is the operative language that places the cure tender into the court record. The check’s amount ($4,338.48), date (May 28, 2024), and payee (Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices) are set out as findings of fact. The full cure-tender analysis, including the Civil Code § 1942 repair-and-deduct arithmetic and the USPS Certified Mail delivery (“Signed for by H H” on May 30, 2024), appears in Section 4.
Exhibits admitted and excluded
The Minute Order identifies specific exhibits admitted into evidence by the Court, and specifically identifies exhibits not admitted:
| Exhibit | Treatment | Description (per Minute Order) |
|---|---|---|
| Exhibit J | Admitted | Two color photographs dated May 1, 2022, depicting a mold-like substance in the subject property. |
| Exhibit K | Admitted | Email from defendant to plaintiff and several others dated June 25, 2024, with pictures and text messages between defendant and Hanson Ly — 11 pages total. |
| Exhibit L | Admitted | Email from defendant to plaintiff’s counsel and others dated January 23, 2025 — 3 pages. |
| Exhibit M | Admitted | Email from defendant to plaintiff’s counsel and plaintiff dated February 4, 2025. Subject: “Lawful photo exchange in the interest of justice Phat v. Gasio.” |
| Exhibit N | Admitted | Text message from defendant to plaintiff regarding a dishwasher. |
| Exhibit O | Admitted | Email message from defendant to plaintiff’s counsel and plaintiff dated February 5, 2025 — 4 pages. |
| Exhibit Q | Admitted | Email from defendant to plaintiff dated February 4, 2025 entitled “Photo Exchange.” |
| Exhibit P | Marked collectively; not admitted | A letter to the Court from defendant dated February 25, 2025, and email messages from defendant to plaintiff’s counsel and plaintiff dated January 30, 2025, three email messages from February 3, 2025, and two from February 4, 2025. |
The documentary record placed before the Court in the summary unlawful detainer proceeding included the cashier’s check, photographs of mold, communications between the parties, and text messages regarding the dishwasher. The broader documentary record examined throughout this case file — the Wells Fargo sixteen-month wire transfer history, the April 2, 2024 inducement email, the April 25, 2024 “Witches burnt Broom” email, the April 26, 2024 executed lease with payment directed to the broker’s personal account, and the June 28, 2024 wire marked “Unknown Contract for July payment 27 of 37 on contracts” — was not placed before the Court in a procedural posture that permitted full examination.
April 5, 2025 — Cashier’s check under protest
Following the March 27, 2025 Minute Order, the plaintiffs tendered a cashier’s check to the Clerk of the Court in the amount of the adjudicated sum, marked explicitly as payment under protest:
| Issuer | Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. |
| Issuer branch | 19840 Beach Blvd., Huntington Beach, CA 92648 |
| Serial number | 0084411978 |
| Account | 4861-511475 |
| Date | April 5, 2025 |
| Amount | $5,338.48 |
| Amount in words | Five Thousand Three Hundred Thirty-Eight and 48/100 US Dollars |
| Purchaser | MICHAEL GASIO |
| Pay to the order of | ***CLERK OF THE COURT*** ***SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA*** |
| Memorandum | PAYMENT UNDER PROTEST |
The cashier’s check was issued by Wells Fargo Bank at the same Huntington Beach branch address (19840 Beach Blvd.) that the Three-Day Notice of June 21, 2024 had designated as the required in-person payment location. The check was made payable directly to the Clerk of the Court, with the memorandum line reading “PAYMENT UNDER PROTEST,” preserving the plaintiffs’ position that the payment was being made in compliance with the court’s order while reserving all rights with respect to the underlying determination.
Source: Wells Fargo cashier’s check #0084411978, Purchaser Copy Pages 1 and 2, dated April 5, 2025.
Governing statutory provisions
California provisions applicable to the procedural posture documented in this section
- Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1161 · Unlawful detainer notice requirements Applicable to the Three-Day Notice that served as the predicate document for the unlawful detainer complaint filed July 3, 2024. Notice content defects are examined in Section 3.
- Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1161.2 · Limits on access to unlawful detainer records Governs public access restrictions to unlawful detainer court records in the first sixty days of filing. Relevant to the procedural posture under which documentation was placed before the Court.
- Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1179 · Relief from forfeiture Provides the trial court with equitable jurisdiction to relieve a tenant from forfeiture upon appropriate showing. Applicable to the procedural context in which the cashier’s check tender at Section 4 was acknowledged in the Minute Order.
- Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 473 · Relief from judgment Applicable to any motion to vacate or set aside a judgment on grounds of mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, where documentation not placed before the Court in the summary proceeding has become available.
- Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 3.3 · Candor toward the tribunal Governs the duties of counsel appearing in any matter before a tribunal, including the duty not to knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal. Applicable to the conduct of counsel of record appearing in the unlawful detainer proceeding.
- Cal. R. Prof. Conduct 1.1 · Competence Governs the duty of attorney competence, including the diligent and informed handling of the predicate notice and the documentary record supporting an unlawful detainer action.