Section 1942
- Citation
- Section 1942
- Parent Document
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 2018-08-15
Other Sections in This Document (73)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Winslett v. 1811 27th Ave., LLC, 237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 25 (2018)
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
- Section 1942
Full Text
2,025 charsSection 1942.5, subdivision (d) provides that "it is unlawful for a lessor to increase rent, decrease services, cause a lessee to quit involuntarily, bring an action to recover possession, or threaten to do any of those acts, for the purpose of retaliating against the lessee because he or she has lawfully organized or participated in a lessees' association or an organization advocating lessees' rights or has lawfully and peaceably exercised any rights under the law." Subdivision (h) of the statute, in turn, states that "Any lessor or agent of a lessor who violates [ section 1942.5 ] shall be liable to the lessee in a civil action for all of the following: [¶] (1) The actual damages sustained by the lessee. [¶] (2) Punitive damages in an amount of not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than two thousand dollars ($2,000) for each retaliatory act where the lessor or agent has been guilty of fraud, oppression, or malice with respect to that act." The landlord can defend against an action *248for retaliatory eviction by showing that it acted "for any lawful cause" ( § 1942.5, subd. (f) ) or "in good faith" (id ., subd. (g) ).6 *34Winslett's eighth cause of action for retaliation and fifteenth cause of action for retaliatory eviction both rest on section 1942.5, subdivision (d), as asserted in a "civil action" under subdivision (h). Each claim incorporates by reference the same factual background allegations, which include events encompassing the entire history of Sagi's alleged indifference to Winslett's complaints about dilapidated conditions; her complaint to Vector Control; Sagi's irate response; and Sagi's continued refusal to make meaningful repairs after the visit from Vector Control, finally culminating in his serving a notice to quit and filing an unlawful detainer action. Specifically, in paragraph 15 of the first amended complaint, Winslett alleges that "On or about January 21, 2015, [Sagi] filed an unlawful detainer lawsuit seeking to evict [her] from the Subject Premises."