Erlach v. Sierra Asset Servicing, LLC, 226 Cal. App. 4th 1281 (2014)

Citation: Erlach v. Sierra Asset Servicing, LLC, 226 Cal. App. 4th 1281 (2014)
Parent Document: Erlach v. Sierra Asset Servicing, LLC, 226 Cal. App. 4th 1281 (2014)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2014-06-10
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2677838/erlach-v-sierra-asset-servicing-llc/ ↗

Full Text

1,059 chars

9
        We recognize that the mere "existence of a prohibited (uninhabitable) condition or
other noncompliance with applicable code standards does not necessarily constitute a
breach of the warranty of habitability." (Friedman et al., Cal. Practice Guide: Landlord–
Tenant (The Rutter Group 2012) § 3:39, p. 3–13, citing Green, supra, 10 Cal.3d at pp.
637–638.) Whether a particular defect or violation of a housing code constitutes a breach
of the implied warranty of habitability depends on the severity and duration of the defect
or violation. (Friedman et al., supra, §§ 3:46 to 3:47, pp. 3–14 to 3–15.) In Green,
supra,10 Cal.3d at page 637, however, the court stated that "[i]n most cases substantial
compliance with those applicable building and housing code standards which materially
affect health and safety will suffice to meet the landlord's obligations under the common
law implied warranty of habitability . . . ." It follows that substantial noncompliance with
applicable code standards could lead to a breach of the warranty of habitability.

Other Sections in This Document (35)

Full Text