Section 1803
- Citation
- Section 1803
- Parent Document
- Bohbot v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827 (2005)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 2005-10-13
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
273 charsthat a second owner-occupancy eviction attempted within four years of dismissal of an earlier eviction is brought in bad faith. The Board contends the Regulation is permissible as it creates only a substantive defense to eviction, not an improper procedural requirement. 10