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

2,336 chars

12
subletting or assignment,‖ section 37.9(a)(2)(B) provides that ―a landlord shall not
endeavor to recover possession of a rental unit as a result of the addition to the unit of a
tenant‘s child, parent, grandchild, grandparent, brother or sister, or the spouse or
domestic partner . . . of such relatives, or as a result of the addition of the spouse or
domestic partner of a tenant, so long as the maximum number of occupants [authorized
by the Rent Ordinance] is not exceeded, if the landlord has unreasonably refused a
written request by the tenant to add such occupant(s) to the unit.‖ Section 37.9(a)(2)(B)
further provides that ―[a] landlord‘s reasonable refusal of the tenant‘s written request may
not be based on the proposed additional occupant‘s lack of creditworthiness, if that
person will not be legally obligated to pay some or all of the rent to the landlord. . . .‖
       Thus, section 37.9(a)(2)(B) prohibits a landlord from unreasonably refusing to add
family members as ―occupants,‖ and also acknowledges that a person who will not be
legally obligated to pay rent may nevertheless lawfully occupy the unit. By using the
word occupant in these contexts, the Rent Ordinance affords protections to inhabitants
whether or not they fall within the formal definition of a tenant set forth in section
37.2(t).
       A second example that the Rent Ordinance distinguishes between legal occupants
and tenants is found in section 37.3, which regulates rent increases. Section 37.3,
subdivision (a)(11)(A) provides that, with exceptions, ―a landlord may not impose
increases solely because a tenant has added an additional occupant to an existing tenancy,
including, but not limited to, a newborn child or family member as defined in Section 401
of the Housing Code. The prohibition on increases mandated by this Subsection (A) shall
apply notwithstanding a rental agreement or lease that specifically permits a rent increase
[f]or additional occupants.‖
       By describing newborn children and new family members of the tenant as
occupants rather than tenants in their own right, section 37.3, subdivision (a)(11)(A) is
another example of the fact that, while the Rent Ordinance provides protections to all
legal occupants of a rental unit, all such occupants are not tenants as that term is defined
in section 37.2(t).

Other Sections in This Document (44)

Full Text