3
non-natural persons thereby.” The court did not rule on the other ground for
demurrer the tenants raised.
II.
DISCUSSION
Both below and on appeal, the tenants framed the primary issue as
whether the term “landlord” under rule 12.14 includes a revocable trust
established by natural persons who are both settlors and trustees of the
trust.5 We agree with appellants, however, that title to the building is held
by them, not the trust. Accordingly, the relevant question is whether
appellants in their capacity as trustees qualify as a landlord for purposes of
the family move-in provision, and we conclude that they do.
A. Governing Law
1. Standard of review
We review an order sustaining a demurrer de novo. (Hacker v.
Homeward Residential, Inc. (2018) 26 Cal.App.5th 270, 276.) In doing so, “we
accept the truth of material facts properly pleaded in the operative complaint,
but not contentions, deductions, or conclusions of fact or law. We may also
consider matters subject to judicial notice.” (Yvanova v. New Century
Mortgage Corp. (2016) 62 Cal.4th 919, 924.) Regardless of a trial court’s
stated reasons for sustaining a demurrer, we must affirm “ ‘if any one of the
several grounds of demurrer is well taken.’ ” (Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital Dist.
(1992) 2 Cal.4th 962, 967.)
“The proper interpretation of a statute is a question of law” that we
also review de novo. (People v. Jacobo (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 32, 42.) This