Rich v. Schwab, 162 Cal. App. 3d 739 (1984)

Citation: Rich v. Schwab, 162 Cal. App. 3d 739 (1984)
Parent Document: Rich v. Schwab, 162 Cal. App. 3d 739 (1984)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 1984-12-14
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2163911/rich-v-schwab/ ↗

Full Text

1,102 chars

Tenants could prove Landlord’s retaliatory purpose only by circumstantial evidence. Landlord’s quick response to Tenants’ protected acts (Civ. Code, § 1942.5, subd. (c)) shows Landlord may have increased rent to retaliate against Tenants’ rent control efforts. Two days after the first rent moratorium, Landlord noticed a 13 percent rent increase. Four days after agreeing, under City pressure, to arbitrate future rent increases, Landlord noticed the $80 per month increase. Moreover, in his declaration, a RCMP lessee stated Landlord Schwab told him Schwab intended to make Tenants’ life difficult because management spent over $40,000 in attorney fees contesting the City’s rent moratorium. Further, the arbitrator ultimately reduced the $80 increase to $30. Considering the arbitrator’s decision finding an $80 increase excessive, a jury could reasonably conclude Landlord’s purported business motive was a pretext. Where, as here, an inference of retaliation may reasonably be drawn, the court improperly granted Landlord summary judgment on the section 1942.5, subdivision (c) cause of action. IV

Other Sections in This Document (29)

Full Text