Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)

Citation: Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Parent Document: Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2005-10-13
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2264118/bohbot-v-santa-monica-rent-cont... ↗

Other Sections in This Document (121)

Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
Section 1806
Section 1806
Section 1806
Section 1806
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 2004
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803
Section 1803

Full Text

357 chars

Bohbot then brought the instant action against Cope and the Board, seeking a declaratory judgment that the regulation on which Cope relied was void. Bohbot sought summary judgment on this basis. The Board responded that the trial court need not consider the validity of the regulation. The Board argued that, regardless of the regulation, Bohbot would never