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

2,173 chars

9
may receive the interpretation that best effectuates that intent. [Citation.]‖ ‘ [Citation.]
We begin by examining the words of the statute because the ‗ ― ‗language is generally the
most reliable indicator of legislative intent. [Citation.]‘ ‖ ‘ [Citation.] The statutory
language is not read in isolation, however. Rather, we consider its terms ‗in the context
of the statutory framework as a whole in order to determine its scope and purpose and to
harmonize the various parts of the enactment. If the language is clear, courts must
generally follow its plain meaning unless a literal interpretation would result in absurd
consequences the Legislature did not intend.‘ [Citation.]‖ (Los Angeles Unified School
Dist. v. Garcia (2013) 58 Cal.4th 175, 186; see also Danekas v. San Francisco
Residential Rent Stabilization & Arbitration Bd. (2001) 95 Cal.App.4th 638, 645.)
       As noted above, the appellate panel concluded that ―since the relocation payments
and the definition of a tenant owed those payments are expressly stated in the Ellis Act,
the section must be strictly complied with.‖ The premise of this statement is erroneous.11
The Ellis Act does not expressly address relocation payments or define the term ―tenant.‖
However, as noted above, the Ellis Act does recognize a public entity‘s authority to
mitigate the adverse impact on ―persons‖ displaced by an Ellis Act eviction. (Gov. Code,
§ 7060.1, subd. (c).) Thus, we turn to the Rent Ordinance provisions to determine what
persons displaced by an Ellis Act eviction are entitled to a relocation payment benefit.
       B. The Rent Ordinance Definition of a Tenant
       As reflected in our statutory overview, section 37.9A(e)(3) provides that ―each
tenant‖ displaced under section 37.9(a)(13) ―shall be entitled‖ to a relocation payment.
Although the Rent Ordinance contains a set of definitions to be used for ―purposes‖ of
applying section 37.9A, the term ―tenant‖ is not defined there. (Rent Ordinance,
§ 37.9A(e)(3)(E)(vi).)
       However, the general ―Definitions‖ section of the Rent Ordinance contains the
following definition: ―Tenant. A person entitled by written or oral agreement, sub-

Other Sections in This Document (44)

Full Text