1
in provision as “a natural person, or group of natural persons, . . . who in good
faith hold a recorded fee interest in the property.” 2 (Rule 12.14(a).)
The tenants demurred to the complaint, arguing that their landlord is
not such a natural person or group of natural persons because title to the
apartment building is held by appellants’ revocable living trust. The trial
court accepted this argument, sustained the demurrer without leave to
amend, and entered judgment for the tenants in December 2019.
In sustaining the demurrer, the trial court correctly ruled that a trust
is not a “natural person.” (See, e.g., Kadison, Pfaelzer, Woodard, Quinn &
Rossi v. Wilson (1987) 197 Cal.App.3d 1, 4.) But it was mistaken in assuming
that appellants’ trust is the landlord. As a matter of law, only trustees—not
trusts—can hold legal title to property. We hold that natural persons who
are acting as trustees of a revocable living trust and are also the trust’s
settlors and beneficiaries qualify as a “landlord” under the family move-in
provision. Accordingly, appellants are not barred from seeking to evict the
tenants under that provision, and we reverse and remand for further
proceedings.3
I.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL
BACKGROUND
Appellants own a two-unit building in San Francisco. They live in one
unit, and the tenants rent the other. In mid-2018, appellants transferred
title of the building to the Vinokur and Boshernitsan Living Trust Dated