Cal. Apartment Assn. v. City of Pasadena (2025)

Citation: Cal. Apartment Assn. v. City of Pasadena (2025)
Parent Document: Cal. Apartment Assn. v. City of Pasadena (2025)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2025-12-18
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10761039/cal-apartment-assn-v-city-of-pasadena/ ↗

Full Text

1,095 chars

for implementing Measure H does not read its provisions to
mandate any notice that extends the notice timelines under Code
of Civil Procedure section 1161. (See Rental Housing Assn. of
Northern Alameda County v. City of Oakland (2009)
171 Cal.App.4th 741, 763-764 [rent board regulations
demonstrated any vagueness in ordinance regarding the timing
of a tenant’s opportunity to cure had been clarified and
corrected].) But the regulations do not confirm one way or
another whether the Rental Board interprets the challenged
notice requirement in a manner that conflicts with Code of Civil
Procedure section1161, subdivision (2). While the regulations
describe a Written Notice to Cease, as defined under section
1803(cc), as something “that was previously issued with the
notice of termination of tenancy” under section 1161, thus
implying concurrent service of the two notices, that description is
only applicable when a landlord is seeking to evict a tenant based
on a breach of lease or nuisance under section 1806(a)(2) and (3),
as opposed to the nonpayment of rent under section 1806(a)(1).

Other Sections in This Document (114)

Full Text