Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

2710 Sutter Ventures, LLC v. Millis (2022)

Citation
2710 Sutter Ventures, LLC v. Millis (2022)
Parent Document
2710 Sutter Ventures, LLC v. Millis (2022)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2022-08-31

Other Sections in This Document (66)

Full Text

1,682 chars
19
of the statute.’ [Citation.] We start with the language of each
statute, giving the words their usual and ordinary meaning, and
construe the statutory language in the context of the statute as a
whole and the overall statutory scheme, giving significance to
every word, phrase, sentence, and part of an act. We do not
construe statutes in isolation, but rather read each statute with
reference to the entire scheme of law of which it is part so that
the whole may be harmonized and retain its effectiveness. If
statutory terms are ambiguous, we may examine extrinsic
sources, including the ostensible objects to be achieved and the
legislative history. In such circumstance, we will choose the
construction that comports most closely with the Legislature’s
apparent intent, and endeavor to promote rather than defeat the
statute’s general purpose, and avoid a construction that would
lead to absurd consequences.” (Lincoln Place Tenants Assn. v.
City of Los Angeles (2007) 155 Cal.App.4th 425, 440.)
      Government Code section 7060.6’s plain language
establishes that a defense thereunder is not limited to
noncompliance with regulations adopted under Government Code
sections 7060.2, 7060.4, and 7060.5. The statute states, “If an
owner seeks to displace a tenant or lessee from accommodations
withdrawn from rent or lease pursuant to this chapter by an
unlawful detainer proceeding, the tenant or lessee may appear
and answer or demur pursuant to Section 1170 of the Code of
Civil Procedure and may assert by way of defense that the owner
has not complied with the applicable provisions of this chapter, or
statutes, ordinances, or regulations of public entities adopted to