Action Apartment Ass'n v. City of Santa Monica

Bad Law
2007 Cal. LEXIS 8188·41 Cal. 4th 1232·63 Cal. Rptr. 3d 398·163 P.3d 89
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 2, 2007No. S129448California9,029 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Moreno, J.

In this case, we determine whether and to what extent the litigation privilege of Civil Code section 47, subdivision (b), conflicts with and thus preempts a section of the City of Santa Monica’s “Tenant Harassment” ordinance. In relevant part, the ordinance authorizes civil and criminal penalties against a landlord who maliciously serves a notice of eviction or brings any action to recover possession of a rental unit without a reasonable factual or legal basis. The Court of Appeal held that the litigation privilege conflicts with and thus preempts the entirety of this section of the City of Santa Monica’s Tenant Harassment ordinance. We conclude, however, that while the litigation privilege preempts entirely the second provision of this section regarding filing an action to recover possession of a rental unit, it preempts only partially the first provision regarding serving a notice of eviction.

I. THE CITY’S TENANT HARASSMENT ORDINANCE

In 1979, the City of Santa Monica (City) adopted a rent control charter amendment, which established a rent control board to regulate rentals “so that rents will not be increased unreasonably and so that landlords will receive no more…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.