24 Cited authorities

  1. Lindsey v. Normet

    405 U.S. 56 (1972)   Cited 786 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the state has no obligation to provide adequate housing
  2. Zoran Corp. v. Chen

    185 Cal.App.4th 799 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 133 times
    Listing twenty-one non-exhaustive factors
  3. Green v. Superior Court

    10 Cal.3d 616 (Cal. 1974)   Cited 224 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a tenant can raise the landlord's breach of an implied warranty of habitability as a defense in an unlawful detainer action
  4. Superior Motels, Inc. v. Rinn Motor Hotels, Inc.

    195 Cal.App.3d 1032 (Cal. Ct. App. 1987)   Cited 115 times
    Finding that a breach is material if it is so dominant or pervasive as in any real or substantial measure to frustrate the purpose of the contract
  5. Ayala v. Dawson

    13 Cal.App.5th 1319 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 36 times
    Holding that the burden is on party asserting doctrine
  6. Drybread v. Chipain Chiropractic Corp.

    151 Cal.App.4th 1063 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 44 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Drybread, 151 Cal. App 4th 1063, 60 Cal.Rptr.3d 580, the court considered an unlawful detainer action brought by a commercial tenant against his sublessee.
  7. Martin-Bragg v. Moore

    219 Cal.App.4th 367 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 25 times
    Holding that trial court has the power to stay unlawful detainer proceeding or consolidate it with a pending action in which title is at issue "because a successful claim of title by the tenant would defeat the landlord's right to possession"
  8. Berry v. Society of Saint Pius X

    69 Cal.App.4th 354 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 27 times
    Rejecting argument that original priest was "synonymous with the religious organization governed by the corporation"
  9. Union Oil Co. v. Chandler

    4 Cal.App.3d 716 (Cal. Ct. App. 1970)   Cited 47 times
    In UnionOil, in order to decide whether the eviction was unlawfully retaliatory the trial court would have been compelled to undertake the weighty task of determining whether the company had in fact violated federal antitrust laws.
  10. Wilson v. Gentile

    8 Cal.App.4th 759 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 8 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Docket No. B057235. August 4, 1992. Appeal from Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. LASC WEC 128945, James F. Nelson, Temporary Judge. Pursuant to California Constitution, article VI, section 21. COUNSEL Richard H. Benes for Defendant, Cross-complainant and Appellant. Rosenfeld, Meyer Susman, Kirk M. Hallam and David F. Graber for Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Respondent. OPINION JOHNSON, J. In this case we are asked to interpret a clause requiring an option to be exercised "within thirty

  11. Section 450 - Must be authorized or required by law

    Cal. Evid. Code § 450   Cited 189 times
    Specifying procedures for taking judicial notice
  12. Section 2044 - Certain property for which marital deduction was previously allowed

    26 U.S.C. § 2044   Cited 70 times   4 Legal Analyses
    In sections 2044 and 2519 the Code in essence continues the deemed transfer premise of section 2056(b)(7) and treats the surviving spouse as if he or she owned the QTIP outright.
  13. Section 62 - Transfers not change of ownership

    Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code § 62   Cited 47 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Listing as exclusion to change of ownership "[a]ny transfer of a lessor's interest in taxable real property subject to a lease with a remaining term ... of 35 years or more"
  14. Section 2207A - Right of recovery in the case of certain marital deduction property

    26 U.S.C. § 2207A   Cited 33 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (a) Recovery with respect to estate tax (1) In general If any part of the gross estate consists of property the value of which is includible in the gross estate by reason of section 2044 (relating to certain property for which marital deduction was previously allowed), the decedent's estate shall be entitled to recover from the person receiving the property the amount by which- (A) the total tax under this chapter which has been paid, exceeds (B) the total tax under this chapter which would have

  15. Section 9058 - Temporary moratorium on eviction filings

    15 U.S.C. § 9058   Cited 29 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Defining "covered propert[ies]"
  16. Section 9057 - Forbearance of residential mortgage loan payments for multifamily properties with Federally backed loans

    15 U.S.C. § 9057   Cited 8 times   2 Legal Analyses

    (a) In general During the covered period, a multifamily borrower with a Federally backed multifamily mortgage loan experiencing a financial hardship due, directly or indirectly, to the COVID-19 emergency may request a forbearance under the terms set forth in this section. (b) Request for relief A multifamily borrower with a Federally backed multifamily mortgage loan that was current on its payments as of February 1, 2020, may submit an oral or written request for forbearance under subsection (a)

  17. Rule 8.823 - Extending the time to appeal

    Cal. R. 8.823

    (a) Extension of time This rule operates only to increase the time to appeal otherwise prescribed in rule 8.822(a); it does not shorten the time to appeal. If the normal time to appeal stated in rule 8.822(a) would be longer than the time provided in this rule, the time to appeal stated in rule 8.822(a) governs. (b)Motion for a new trial If any party serves and files a valid notice of intention to move for a new trial, the following extensions of time apply: (1) If the motion is denied, the time