DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- Citation
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- Parent Document
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 2000-09-14
Other Sections in This Document (100)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- DeZerega v. Meggs, 99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (2000)
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
- § 1954
Full Text
857 charsPlaintiffs David and Sara DeZerega are owners of an apartment building on Piedmont Avenue in Berkeley, which includes the three-bedroom unit at issue in this lawsuit (hereafter the premises). In late December of 1995, Sara DeZerega executed an agreement to lease the premises to Helen Yoon, who was identified in the lease as “Tenants” or “Tenant(s).” The lease, which was largely typewritten or computer-generated, provided that the premises were “to be used only as a private residence by, and occupancy is limited to, the following named persons: Helen Yoon and Two roommates.” It went on to provide that “[a]ny unregistered occupant or occupancy by any person disallowed by Owner shall void this agreement and possession of the premises shall revert to Owner.” It flatly prohibited any assignment or subletting. In February 1997, defendant Jason Meggs 1