Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Bisno v. DOUGLAS EMMETT REALTY FUND 1988, 174 Cal. App. 4th 1534 (2009)

Citation
Bisno v. DOUGLAS EMMETT REALTY FUND 1988, 174 Cal. App. 4th 1534 (2009)
Parent Document
Bisno v. DOUGLAS EMMETT REALTY FUND 1988, 174 Cal. App. 4th 1534 (2009)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2009-06-19

Other Sections in This Document (132)

Full Text

1,133 chars
Sherwood told Mordoh that Bisno lived in Northern California when he leased the unit, that Bisno did so because he planned to spend more time in Southern California, and that even though the Bisnos were married at that time, Jeanette was not a tenant on the lease. Sherwood summarized the various disputes between the Bisnos and Emmett, including the parking spaces, the time Jeanette was denied access to the unit, and the incident where Jeanette placed a parking sticker on the forehead of an employee at The Shores. Sherwood told Mordoh about the specifics of the rent control hearing, the evidence presented by the Bisnos, and the comment by Bisno’s lawyer about the possible applicability of a Costa-Hawkins rent increase. Sherwood told Mordoh about Bisno’s February 2003 letters trying to add Jeanette to the lease and the hearing officer’s findings. Sherwood then asked Mordoh whether Emmett had a legitimate basis to proceed under CostaHawkins. Mordoh said it did, but warned that Bisno would probably not pay the increased rent in February, which would require a notice to pay rent or quit, then an unlawful detainer action.