It is very rare for the California Supreme Court to review a decision of the Court of Appeal. In this landmark case, the court held that the Ellis Act allows landlords to evict tenants and go out of business for any reason, and the tenant’s allegation that the eviction is retaliatory cannot be a defense to an unlawful detainer claim nor can the withdrawal be the basis of a claim for money damages after leaving. Landlords cannot be compelled to...
Read MoreSan Remo Hotel v. City and County of San Francisco
This case was a 12-year battle challenging the constitutionality of the City’s efforts to force our clients to rent rooms in their small historic hotel to low-income permanent residents, rather than tourists. Ultimately, the City granted a permit allowing tourist use, but imposed a permit condition requiring the payment of $567,000. Thomas and Robert Field, the owners of the San Remo, claimed that the fee is extortion and violates the...
Read MoreTom v. City and County of San Francisco
In San Francisco many aspiring homeowners join together to buy buildings. They share ownership of the entire building 100% but privately agree in writing to split up the units among themselves. San Francisco tried to stop these agreements in order to discourage home ownership. The Court of Appeal agreed with us that doing so would violate the California Constitution’s right to privacy.
Our clients – who were neighboring tenants of plaintiffs (who were also tenants) – were sued for wrongful eviction. Plaintiffs claimed that out clients conspired with the landlord to force plaintiffs out of the building because they are disabled. Our clients were sued for calling animal control to report that plaintiffs’ 160 pound dog was dangerous and participating in the landlord’s attempt to evict plaintiffs in court....
Read MoreFrye v. Tenderloin Housing Clinic
The California Supreme Court held that nonprofit law firms can practice law without registering with the State Bar like for-profit firms must, but told the Bar to conduct a study to determine whether such groups imperil clients and, if so, whether registration could solve the problem. The State Bar’s 44-page report of August 20, 2007 affirms our argument to the Supreme Court and demonstrates it effectively agrees with us that nonprofits...
Read MoreIn a very important opinion, the Court of Appeal reversed the San Francisco Superior Court and held that: 1) serving an eviction notice (here for relative move-in) was an exercise of the First Amendment right to petition; and 2) a tenant’s suit arising from the service of that notice triggered the state anti-SLAPP statute, which requires plaintiffs suing over a defendant’s exercise of the right of petition or free speech on a public issue to...
Read MoreIn Daro, the Court of Appeal reversed a San Francisco Superior Court decision preventing landlords from invoking the Ellis Act based on violations of unrelated laws if the Ellis Act invocation has some general connection to the other law. The Court of Appeal said that the trial courts have no power to force landlords to stay in business and the other violations could be directly addressed instead.
Reidy v. City and County of San Francisco
The Court of Appeal ruled that owners of residential hotels who invoke the Ellis Act have a right to convert them to non-rental housing or demolish them, despite a city ordinance that requires replacement of the lost housing.
Johnson v. City and County of San Francisco
The Court of Appeal held that San Francisco could not, as a condition of invoking the Ellis Act, require landlords to state a belief as to how much relocation money tenants are entitled to based on age, disability, or other conditions. Read the Court’s opinion by clicking here.
Ching v. San Francisco Board of Permit Appeals
In this case, our client convinced the City’s Board of Appeals to consider their application to be deemed approved because the City Planning Commission failed to act on the application within the time frame required by state law. A group of tenants sued the Board of Appeals claiming that an individual on the Board of Appeals should not have voted because he had a conflict of interest. The trial court agreed with the tenants, but the...
Read More
