§ 3513

Citation: § 3513
Parent Document: Gombiner v. Swartz, 167 Cal. App. 4th 1365 (2008)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2008-10-29
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2259791/gombiner-v-swartz/ ↗

Full Text

935 chars

By misperceiving the parties’ having a right to exempt the duplex from the RSO’s limits on lawful rent, the court misinstructed the jury. First, the court instructed the jury that the settlement agreement meant tenant could not claim landlord charged more rent than the RSO allowed. The court’s misinstruction eviscerated tenant’s cause of action to recover excess rent paid in violation of the RSO. Second, the court barred tenant from arguing to the jury that he had withheld rent to recover his rent overpayments. That misinstruction made landlord’s victory in his cause of action for breach of the lease a virtually foregone conclusion. Indeed, the jury submitted a written question to the court during jury deliberations revealing the jury’s incomprehension of tenant’s behavior, asking: “Why did [landlord] not force out [tenant] after several months of unpaid rent? . . . What specifically justified the two years without rent?”

Other Sections in This Document (66)

Full Text