Court
OC Superior Court · Dept. C61
A statutory-math architecture of available recoveries on the documentary record. Two-senior framework applies to Michael Gasio (age 72) and Tetyana Zvyagintseva (age 65+); Yulia Gasio (age 42) is co-plaintiff on non-senior counts. No aggregate target is named. Every recovery line traces to a specific California or federal statute. Subject to court determination on each count. No finding has been made.
| Claimant | Age | Senior status | Available statutory remedies |
|---|---|---|---|
| Michael A. Gasio | 72 | Senior 65+ | All civil + criminal counts. Senior multipliers under WIC §15657.5 (treble + fees), Civ. §3345 (up to 3× authorized recovery), Civ. §1942.5(f)(2) (enhanced retaliatory eviction punitive damages up to $2,000 per act). Lead plaintiff on §1950.5(l). |
| Yulia S. Gasio | 42 | Non-senior co-plaintiff | Shared recovery on §1950.5(l) (joint deposit tender), Civ. §1572 fraud, Civ. §1710 deceit, Civ. §1567 consent vitiation, Civ. §1941.1 habitability, FHA §3604/§3617 (national origin LEP household), B&P §17200 UCL, common-law fraud + §3294 punitive. Not entitled to senior multipliers personally; recovery scales with non-senior statutory framework. |
| Tetyana Zvyagintseva | 65+ | Senior LEP named occupant | Named ¶1.B of 2022 + 2024 leases. Standing as named lease party for tenancy-statute counts; standing as protected-class member for FHA national-origin + LEP claims. Senior multipliers under WIC §15657.5 + Civ. §3345 + Civ. §1942.5(f)(2) parallel to Michael's recovery. |
Three occupants of the leased premises. Two are seniors on the documentary record. The senior framework attaches to Michael (72) and Tetyana (65+); Yulia (42) is co-plaintiff on shared non-senior counts. Recovery scaling is calculated separately for each claimant's standing.
| Component | Amount | Statutory anchor |
|---|---|---|
| Security deposit at issue | $5,000.00 | Civ. §1950.5(b) |
| Other deposits at issue (keys + pet) | $1,375.00 | Civ. §1950.5(b) |
| Total deposit credits | $6,375.00 | Documentary anchor: MOR Credits column |
| §1950.5(l) statutory damages cap (2× security) | $12,750.00 | Civ. §1950.5(l) — up to 2× security retained |
| Plus actual damages on retention | Court-determined | §1950.5(l) |
The Move-Out Clearance Report executed August 5, 2024 contains a pre-formatted Attorney Fees deduction line of $2,005 outside the §1950.5(b) closed list. The form is distributed publicly by Silverstein Eviction Law on the firm's website. The same DocuSign Envelope ID F5D247C2-A1A9-4991-B91F-6A333347A87D appears on the blank template and the executed Gasio document — chain-of-custody proven by the form's own metadata. Bad-faith retention triggers the §1950.5(l) 2× cap.
| Component | Statutory cap | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Punitive damages per retaliatory act (base) | Court-determined | Civ. §1942.5(g) |
| Senior enhancement — up to $2,000 per act × 2 seniors | Up to $4,000 / act | Civ. §1942.5(f)(2) |
| Actual damages | Court-determined | Common-law damages |
| Attorney's fees and costs | Court-awarded | Civ. §1942.5(i) |
Three-Day Notice served June 21, 2024 — within 180 days of plaintiff's documented §1942 repair-and-deduct exercise on the dishwasher remedy. Cure tender of $4,338.48 by USPS Cert 9534914882764149935944 delivered 5/30/2024 signed "H H" — sealed and never credited. §1942.5(d) rebuttable presumption of retaliation arises. §1942.5(f)(2) senior enhancement (up to $2,000 per retaliatory act) applies to each senior — Michael (72) and Tetyana (65+) — separately.
| Component | Multiplier | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Actual damages (per senior claimant) | Court-determined | WIC §15610.30 |
| Treble damages on actual harm | 3× actual | WIC §15657.5(a) |
| Attorney's fees and costs | Court-awarded | WIC §15657.5(a) |
| Punitive damages | Court-determined | Stacks with Civ. §3294 |
WIC §15610.27 defines an elder as any person 65+ residing in California. Michael Gasio (72) and Tetyana Zvyagintseva (65+) qualify. WIC §15610.30 defines financial elder abuse as the taking, secreting, appropriating, obtaining, or retaining of real or personal property of an elder for wrongful use, with intent to defraud, or by undue influence. The documentary record on Counts 01-13 of state-civil-counts presents the §15610.30 framework. WIC §15657.5 awards treble damages plus attorney's fees on financial elder abuse — per senior claimant.
| Multiplier base | §3345 cap | Applies to |
|---|---|---|
| §1950.5(l) statutory damages | Up to 3× | Per senior on shared deposit transaction |
| B&P §17206 UCL civil penalties | Up to 3× | Per senior |
| FDCPA §1692k statutory damages | Up to 3× | Per senior |
| Other consumer-protection statutory recoveries | Up to 3× | Per senior — case-by-case |
Clark v. Superior Court (2010) 50 Cal.4th 605 — Civ. §3345 senior multiplier attaches to fines, civil penalties, or treble damages authorized under any consumer-protection statute. Multiplier applies separately to each senior claimant on shared transactions. Stacks with WIC §15657.5 treble where independently established.
| Component | Multiplier | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Actual harm caused by attorney deceit | Court-determined | B&P §6128(a) |
| Civil treble damages on attorney deceit | 3× actual | B&P §6128(b) |
| Misdemeanor exposure on attorney | Criminal track | B&P §6128(a) |
B&P §6128(a) provides that an attorney guilty of deceit or collusion with intent to deceive the court or any party is guilty of a misdemeanor. §6128(b) authorizes civil treble damages against the attorney in favor of the party injured. The documentary record on Count 14 (B&P §6068(d) — duty not to mislead by artifice) and Count 15 (B&P §6128(a) — attorney deceit) of state-civil-counts presents the §6128 framework. Civil treble on the attorney is separate from any §1950.5(l), WIC §15657.5, or Civ. §3345 recovery against other defendants.
| Component | Multiplier | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Injury to business or property (actual) | Court-determined | 18 U.S.C. §1964(c) |
| Treble damages on actual injury | 3× actual | §1964(c) |
| Attorney's fees and costs | Court-awarded | §1964(c) |
Civil RICO requires injury "by reason of" a §1962 violation. H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell (1989) 492 U.S. 229 sets the continuity-plus-relationship pattern standard. Pattern continuity documented across Harman v. Tran (prior tenancy same property same counsel) + Gasio v. Tran (present) + parallel Huynh v. Tran/Ly (OCSC 30-2025-01502635-CU-FR-CJC, filed 8/8/2025). Predicate acts (preservation framework): 18 U.S.C. §§1341, 1343, 1344. Global-Tech Appliances v. SEB S.A. (2011) 563 U.S. 754 supplies the willful-blindness scienter anchor. Federal jurisdiction under §1964(c).
| Component | Statutory cap | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Actual damages (all three occupants) | Court-determined | 42 U.S.C. §3613(c)(1) |
| Punitive damages — no statutory cap | No cap | §3613(c)(1) |
| Attorney's fees and costs | Court-awarded | §3613(c)(2) |
| Injunctive relief | Equitable | §3613(c)(1) |
FHA §3604/§3617 recovery runs to all three occupants of the leased premises — protected-class membership available to Tetyana on national-origin / LEP grounds; reasonable inference of household-level discrimination extends to co-occupants under Trafficante v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (1972) 409 U.S. 205 broad-standing framework. State Farm v. Campbell (2003) 538 U.S. 408 supplies the punitive-damages constitutional review framework.
| Component | Cap | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Restitution (private action) | Court-determined | B&P §17203 |
| Injunctive relief (private action) | Equitable | B&P §17203 |
| Civil penalty (public-prosecutor action) | Up to $2,500 / violation | B&P §17206 |
| Senior multiplier on UCL civil penalty | Up to 3× | Civ. §3345 + Clark |
UCL framework reaches all defendants on the three-prong (unlawful / unfair / fraudulent) predicate stack. Private-plaintiff remedy is restitution + injunction; OC DA Real Estate Fraud Unit referral runs the §17206 civil-penalty track on the same conduct.
| Component | Cap | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Prevailing-party attorney's fees on lease attorney-fee clause | Reciprocal recovery | Civ. §1717 |
| Common-law fraud punitive damages | Court-determined | Civ. §3294 |
| Senior multiplier on common-law punitive | Within constitutional limits | State Farm v. Campbell |
Civ. §1717 makes the lease attorney-fee clause reciprocal. Santisas v. Goodin (1998) 17 Cal.4th 599 + Hsu v. Abbara (1995) 9 Cal.4th 863 supply the §1717 framework. Civ. §3294 reaches malice, oppression, or fraud by clear-and-convincing evidence; punitive damages subject to State Farm single-digit-multiplier constitutional review.
| Layer | Statutory framework | Posture on the record |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Civ. §1950.5(l) — bad-faith deposit retention | Up to $12,750 statutory + actuals. Two-senior Civ. §3345 multiplier applies. |
| 2 | Civ. §1942.5 — retaliatory eviction (senior enhancement) | Up to $2,000 per act per senior + actual damages + attorney's fees. |
| 3 | WIC §15657.5 — financial elder abuse | Treble damages on actual harm + attorney's fees per senior. |
| 4 | Civ. §3345 — senior consumer multiplier | Up to 3× authorized recovery per senior on consumer-protection statutes. |
| 5 | B&P §6128(a)/(b) — attorney deceit | Civil treble damages on attorney + misdemeanor track. |
| 6 | 18 U.S.C. §1964(c) — civil RICO | Treble damages + attorney's fees on pattern of racketeering. |
| 7 | 42 U.S.C. §3613(c) — FHA | Actual + uncapped punitive + attorney's fees. |
| 8 | B&P §17206 — UCL civil penalties | Up to $2,500 per violation (public action); restitution + injunction (private). |
| 9 | Civ. §3294 — common-law punitive | Court-determined, single-digit multiplier under State Farm. |
The nine layers above are the statutory framework on the documentary record. They are not summed. They are not aggregated. Each is subject to proof of elements on the count it accompanies. Each is subject to court determination on the count. The architecture is the framework within which any recovery will be situated; the verdict belongs to the trier of fact. The plaintiffs are not seeking an aggregate dollar number on this page; they are presenting the statutory math.
State civil counts (predicate causes of action for layers 1-5, 8, 9): state-civil-counts.html. Federal civil counts (predicate causes of action for layers 6, 7): federal-civil-counts.html. Criminal exposure on parallel conduct: criminal-counts.html. Primary-document evidence index: evidence-index.html.
This portal is a public-interest case file assembled and published by Michael A. Gasio, plaintiff pro se in Gasio v. Tran et al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2024-01410991-CL-UD-CJC. The plaintiff is not an attorney. Nothing on this portal constitutes legal advice.
Every factual assertion is drawn from primary documents — executed contracts, bank records, emails, text messages, court filings, public licensing records, and public-records directory entries — preserved in the case file and referenced by source and date. Every characterization is an allegation.
No statement on this portal should be read as a determination that any named person has committed a crime, violated a statute, or breached a professional duty. Those determinations are reserved to qualified counsel, regulatory agencies, and the courts. No finding has been made.
This publication is made in the exercise of rights protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 2 of the California Constitution, California Civil Code §47(d), and the Noerr-Pennington doctrine.
This portal at gasiomirror.com/for-counsel/ is a curated subset of the public case file at gasiomirror.com, prepared and published pro se by the named plaintiff, Michael A. Gasio, for the convenience of reviewing counsel, regulatory examiners, and accredited investigators. The portal indexes the same primary documents preserved in the public case file, organized in the procedural intake format a reviewing partner would expect on a case-handoff folder.
Every entry is reachable from the source document, the agency file number, the bank confirmation, the postal tracking record, or the public court docket on which it rests. Every statute citation is reachable from Cornell Legal Information Institute, Justia, or leginfo.ca.gov. Every case citation is reachable from Justia or the California state-court reporter. No claim on this portal appears without one of those three citation hooks.
The portal carries the standing reservation that no determination of liability has been made by any court or regulatory body on the questions presented. The named persons are entitled to respond to the documentary record on the merits, or to remain silent on the merits and accept the documentary inference that follows from silence. Either election is on the record.
© 2026 Michael A. Gasio. All rights reserved. The contents of this portal — including the structural layout, the count entries, the documentary mappings, the citation index, and the narrative framing — are protected under the United States Copyright Act, Title 17 of the United States Code, §§101 et seq., and under the California Civil Code §§980–989. The portal is intended for mature professional audiences: licensed counsel, regulatory examiners, accredited investigators, court personnel, and reporters of court. Permission for limited fair-use citation in agency submissions, judicial filings, and professional review is presumptively granted on attribution to gasiomirror.com with capture date. Permission for bulk reproduction, derivative-work creation, or commercial use is not granted and must be obtained in writing.
Standing posture on the documentary record
The plaintiff has, throughout the twenty-one months between the August 5, 2024 vacate and the present update of this portal, maintained a documentary posture. The plaintiff has organized, preserved, indexed, and submitted the record. The plaintiff has not threatened. The plaintiff has not extorted. The plaintiff has not retaliated. The plaintiff has prepared a record of what occurred and submitted it to authorities authorized to evaluate it. That posture continues.