Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Boshernitsan v. Bach (2021)

Citation
Boshernitsan v. Bach (2021)
Parent Document
Boshernitsan v. Bach (2021)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2021-03-12

Full Text

1,763 chars
5
Francisco, and the agent, representative[,] or successor of any of the
foregoing.” (Rent Ord., § 37.2, subd. (h).) Rule 12.14(a), which is entitled
“Evictions under Section 37.9(a)(8),” further provides that “[f]or purposes of
an eviction under Section 37.9(a)(8) of the [Rent Ordinance], the term
‘landlord’ shall mean a natural person, or group of natural persons . . . who in
good faith hold a recorded fee interest in the property.”6
      B.    Title to the Building Is Held by Appellants as Trustees, not by the
            Trust.
      Appellants argue that they, not the trust, hold title to the building.
They point out that revocable trusts have no right to sue or be sued, and they
assert that the trust is inseparable from them as the settlors and trustees.
We agree that appellants as trustees “hold a recorded fee interest” in the
building under rule 12.14(a).
      To begin with, the tenants are simply incorrect when they argue that
“according to the allegations of the [c]omplaint and the [g]rant [d]eed, the
owner of the [property] is the Vinokur and Boshernitsan Living Trust dated
April 30, 2018.” The complaint alleges that “Plaintiffs”—defined as
Boshernitsan and Vinokur—“are owners of the [b]uilding, of which [the
tenants’ unit] is part, holding 100% of the interest in the property and the title
as trustees of the Vinokur and Boshernitsan Living Trust dated April 30,
2018.” (Italics added.) Likewise, the recorded grant deed states that
appellants “hereby grant to Mark Vinokur and Rimma Boshernitsan,
Trustees, or their successors in interest, of the Vinokur and Boshernitsan
Living Trust dated April 30, 2018, and any amendments thereto, their whole
interest in [the building].” (Italics added.) Thus, the plain terms of both the