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

2,354 chars

13
       Our final example of the fact that the Rent Ordinance distinguishes between a
lawful occupant and a tenant is found in section 37.9C, which was added in 2006 to
provide relocation assistance to tenants displaced by so-called ―No-Fault‖ evictions that
are not based on the Ellis Act. (Rent Ordinance, § 37.9C.) A set of definitions applicable
only for purposes of determining entitlement to the section 37.9C benefit includes the
following definition of an Eligible Tenant: ―For purposes of this section 37.9C, an
Eligible Tenant shall mean any authorized occupant of a rental unit, regardless of age,
who has resided in the unit for 12 or more months.‖ (Rent Ordinance, § 37.9C,
subd. (a)(2).)
       Section 37.9C, subdivision (b) provides that ―Each Eligible Tenant who received a
Covered No-Fault Eviction Notice, in addition to all rights under any other provision of
law, shall be entitled to receive relocation expenses from the landlord, in the amounts
specified in section 37.9C(e).‖ Under section 37.9C, subdivision (e)(1) each Eligible
Tenant shall receive a payment of $4,500.00, with the caveat that the landlord shall not be
required to pay more than $13,500.00 to Eligible Tenants in the same unit. Under section
37.9C, subdivision (e)(2), the landlord must make an additional payment to each Eligible
Tenant who is over 60 or disabled and to ―each household with at least one Eligible
Tenant and at l[e]ast one child under the age of 18 years.‖
       Section 37.9C is relevant to our analysis in two material ways. First, as noted, this
part of the Rent Ordinance utilizes a special definition of an ―Eligible Tenant‖ that
includes all authorized occupants ―regardless of age.‖ (Rent Ordinance, § 37.9C
subd. (a)(2).) This specially defined term would be superfluous if, as the lower courts
found, section 37.2(t) includes within the definition of ―tenant‖ all lawful occupants, even
those without the right to exclusive occupancy and the concomitant obligation to pay
rent, and those who lack the capacity to incur an obligation to pay rent because they are
minors.
       Second, in contrast to section 37.9C, section 37.9A does not contain a special
definition of a tenant who is entitled to an Ellis Act relocation benefit. As our statutory
overview reflects, this part of the Rent Ordinance has been amended several times,

Other Sections in This Document (44)

Full Text