Section 1941

Citation: Section 1941
Parent Document: Knight v. Hallsthammar, 623 P.2d 268 (1981)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 1981-02-13
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1241155/knight-v-hallsthammar/ ↗

Full Text

1,067 chars

The trial court instructed the jury at the request of appellants that the issue in the case "is whether the owner breached the warranty of habitability at the time defendants were served with a three-day notice in June." The court also read Civil Code section 823 to the jury which relates to remedies against assignees of landlord and tenant. It is claimed that the latter instruction conflicts with principles stated in Green and is confusing. However, Green did not declare the code section invalid and courts of course have no power to repeal or amend statutes. Because the instruction in its entirety was merely a quotation of the code section in its entirety, the instruction stated a valid principle of law, and it is not claimed that the statute was inapplicable. There was no error in the instruction. Had appellants wanted additional instructions explaining the applicability of the code section language to the issues of the instant case, they should have requested additional instructions. They did not request them. The judgment should be affirmed. NOTES

Other Sections in This Document (192)

Full Text