Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)

Citation
CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
Parent Document
CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676 (2000)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2000-08-23

Other Sections in This Document (53)

Full Text

451 chars
Appellant argues against this conclusion on two theories. First, it claims the Legislature could not have intended to fully occupy the field because it provided only undefined terms in addressing qualifying vacancies during the interim period. What concerns appellant is the absence of any definition of what constitutes a voluntary vacancy for purposes of the interim increase. This is not a term which requires additional definition in this context.