Hirschfield v. Cohen (2022)

Citation: Hirschfield v. Cohen (2022)
Parent Document: Hirschfield v. Cohen (2022)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2022-08-25
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7859842/hirschfield-v-cohen/ ↗

Full Text

1,366 chars

Richard Hirschfield appeals from a declaratory judgment
finding the property he owns at 746 Marine Street in Santa
Monica is subject to the City of Santa Monica’s (City) rent control
law. In 1994 Hirschfield, as trustee of the Richard S. Hirschfield
Trust, purchased four contiguous lots designated as 738 through
746 Marine Street in Santa Monica; the lots in turn contained
five rental units that were spread over the four parcels. In 2004
Hirschfield withdrew the five rental units from the residential
rental market under the Ellis Act (Gov. Code, § 7060 et seq.).1
Hirschfield demolished the existing structures and erected in
their place four single-family dwellings, each located on a
separate assessor parcel. In 2009 Hirschfield rented the dwelling
at 746 Marine Street (the property) to Tanya Cohen.
       Hirschfield filed a complaint for declaratory relief against
Cohen, and the Santa Monica Rent Control Board (Board) filed a
complaint in intervention against Hirschfield. In adjudicating
the claims of Hirschfield and the Board, the trial court found the
property was subject to rent control under section 7060.2,
subdivision (d), of the Ellis Act (section 7060.2(d)), which
authorizes local agencies to impose rent controls if
“accommodations are demolished, and new accommodations are
constructed on the same property, and offered for rent or lease

Other Sections in This Document (50)

Full Text