Drouet v. Superior Court, 104 Cal. Rptr. 2d 159 (2001)

Citation: Drouet v. Superior Court, 104 Cal. Rptr. 2d 159 (2001)
Parent Document: Drouet v. Superior Court, 104 Cal. Rptr. 2d 159 (2001)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2001-05-23
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2304744/drouet-v-superior-court/ ↗

Full Text

1,143 chars

We look to the various textual provisions of the Ellis Act in the light of the Act's overall nature and obvious purposei.e., the legislative intent underlying the Act. (See Moyer v. Workmen's Camp. Appeals Bd., supra, 10 Cal.3d at p. 230, 110 Cal.Rptr. 144, 514 P.2d 1224.) Well-founded rules of construction direct us to construe the Ellis Act and the retaliatory eviction statute together, to give effect to that overriding legislative intent. (See Select Base Materials v. Board of Equal. (1959) 51 Cal.2d 640, 645, 335 P.2d 672.) To apply that portion of the retaliatory eviction statute which provides for an affirmative defense against eviction would frustrate the clearly enunciated legislative intent of the Ellis Acti.e., that a landlord should have the right to go out of the rental business, within the Act's specified time periods and under its specific procedural requirements. "`"[I]n construing a statute the courts ... will construe the statute with a view to promoting rather than to defeating its general purpose and the policy behind it."`" (City of Costa Mesa v. McKenzie (1973) 30 Cal.App.3d 763, 770,106 Cal.Rptr. 569.)

Other Sections in This Document (78)

Full Text