Danger Panda, LLC v. Launiu, 10 Cal. App. 5th 502 (2017)

Citation: Danger Panda, LLC v. Launiu, 10 Cal. App. 5th 502 (2017)
Parent Document: Danger Panda, LLC v. Launiu, 10 Cal. App. 5th 502 (2017)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2017-04-04
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4380722/danger-panda-llc-v-launiu/ ↗

Full Text

2,192 chars

2
they could remove property from the rental market. [Citation.] ‗[T]he Act was intended
to overrule the Nash decision so as to permit landlords the unfettered right to remove all
residential rental units from the market, consistent, of course, with guidelines as set forth
in the Act and adopted by local governments in accordance thereto.‘ [Citations.]‖
(Johnson v. City and County of San Francisco (2006) 137 Cal.App.4th 7, 12-13
(Johnson).)
       In May 1986, following the passage of the Ellis Act, the Rent Ordinance was
amended to add section 37.9, subdivision (a), subsection (13) (section 37.9(a)(13)), which
recognizes a landlord‘s right to withdraw a residential unit from the rental market. (Ord.
No. 193-86, File No. 109863 (May 19, 1986), p. 8.) In its current form, section
37.9(a)(13) states in pertinent part: ―(a) A landlord shall not endeavor to recover
possession of a rental unit unless: [¶] . . . (13) The landlord wishes to withdraw from rent
or lease all rental units within any detached physical structure and, in addition, in the case
of any detached physical structure containing three or fewer rental units, any other rental
units on the same lot, and complies in full with Section 37.9A with respect to each such
unit, provided, however, that guestrooms or efficiency units within a residential hotel‖
are subject to different rules.3 (Rent Ordinance, § 37.9(a)(13).)
       Section 37.9A of the Rent Ordinance was enacted at the same time as section
37.9(a)(13) in order to confer rights on certain tenants displaced by the Ellis Act. (Ord.
No. 193-86, File No. 109863, supra, pp. 10-19.) In its current form, section 37.9A(e)
requires owners of residential rental properties who seek to withdraw from the rental
market pursuant to the Ellis Act to provide monetary relocation assistance to their
tenants.
       There is no dispute in this case that the board of supervisors has the authority to
require landlords to provide financial relocation assistance to tenants displaced by an
Ellis Act eviction under Government Code section 7060.1, subdivision (c), which states:
―Notwithstanding Section 7060, nothing in this chapter does any of the following: . . .

Other Sections in This Document (44)

Full Text