In what circumstances will a landlord be barred from bringing a claim for damages against the landlord?

Finally, we reject the landlords' brief argument that the penalties levied against them somehow were barred by the doctrine of the election of remedies. "Broadly speaking, election of remedies is the act of choosing between two or more concurrent but inconsistent remedies based upon the same state of facts. Ordinarily a plaintiff need not elect, and cannot be compelled to elect, between inconsistent remedies during the course of a trial prior to judgment. [Citations.] However, if a plaintiff has unequivocally and knowledgeably elected to proceed on one of the remedies he is pursuing, he may be barred recourse to the other." (Roam v. Koop (1974) 41 Cal.App.3d 1035, 1039.) Such a situation arises, for example, where a plaintiff permissibly files a complaint sounding in both tort and contract but then secures the issuance of a writ of attachment, available only as a remedy in a contract action, thus gaining an advantage over the defendant and equitably estopping plaintiff from later seeking the inconsistent remedy of punitive damages under a tort theory. (Id. at pp. 1039-1040; but see id. at p. 1044 [equitable

Page 25