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

1,046 chars

5
with the Board. Citing section 7060.2(d) and Board Regulation
1631,4 the letter stated, “The Board has received a copy of a lease
that shows that you rented one of those units, 746 Marine Street,
on September 19, 2009. Because you rented one of the new units
less than five years after the withdrawal of the demolished units,
all four parcels are again subject to the rent control law.”
Hirschfield’s attorney responded with a letter stating the new
units were exempt from rent control because they were single-
family dwellings.
       On October 17, 2013 Cohen filed an administrative
complaint with the Board alleging the property was subject to
rent control, and that Hirschfield failed to register her tenancy
and increased her rent illegally. However, later that year Cohen
and Hirschfield entered into a settlement agreement and mutual
release resolving her complaint, in which Hirschfield agreed to
pay Cohen for excess rent collected, and the parties agreed the
“current lawful rent” beginning in January 2014 was $5,058.54
per month.

Other Sections in This Document (50)

Full Text