Section 1942

Citation: Section 1942
Parent Document: Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2003-08-11
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2585536/drouet-v-superior-court/ ↗

Other Sections in This Document (188)

Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
Drouet v. Superior Court, 73 P.3d 1185 (2003)
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
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
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
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

600 chars

*592Applying this “persuasive reasoning” to our own state (Schweiger, supra, 3 Cal.3d at p. 513), we chose “to recognize in unlawful detainer actions a defense that the eviction is sought in retaliation for the exercise of statutory rights by the tenant.” (Id. at p. 517.) We later commented that the substance of this common law defense was codified in section 1942.5 (Barela v. Superior Court (1981) 30 Cal.3d 244, 249 [178 Cal.Rptr. 618, 636 P.2d 582]), which had been enacted prior to Schweiger but did not become effective until the following year. (Schweiger, supra, 3 Cal.3d at p. 516, fn. 4.)