Elmassian v. Flores (2021)

Citation: Elmassian v. Flores (2021)
Parent Document: Elmassian v. Flores (2021)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2021-09-27
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5291317/elmassian-v-flores/ ↗

Full Text

1,714 chars

13
        “If the statutory language is not clear, a court may resort to extrinsic sources, like
legislative history.” (926 North Ardmore Avenue, LLC v. County of Los Angeles (2017) 3
Cal.5th 319, 328.) But “‘“‘[i]f the language is clear and unambiguous there is no need for
construction, nor is it necessary to resort to [extrinsic] indicia of the intent of the
Legislature . . . .’”’” (City of Montebello v. Vasquez (2016) 1 Cal.5th 409, 419; see also
Department of Fish & Game v. Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation Dist. (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th
1554, 1562 [other indicia of intent, such as legislative history, may be consulted when a statute
is susceptible of more than one interpretation, but not “[w]hen the language is clear and
unambiguous”]; accord, Diamond Multimedia Systems, Inc. v. Superior Court (1999) 19
Cal.4th 1036, 1047 [“‘If there is no ambiguity in the language, we presume the Legislature
meant what it said and the plain meaning of the statute governs’”].)
        Section 1161.3, provides in relevant part, as follows.
        (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), a landlord shall not terminate
        a tenancy or fail to renew a tenancy based upon an act or acts against a tenant or
        a tenant’s household member that constitute domestic violence as defined in
        Section 6211 of the Family Code,[11] sexual assault as defined in Section 1219,
        stalking as defined in Section 1708.7 of the Civil Code or Section 646.9 of the
        Penal Code, human trafficking as defined in Section 236.1 of the Penal Code,
        or abuse of an elder or a dependent adult as defined in Section 15610.07 of the
        Welfare and Institutions Code, if both of the following apply:

Other Sections in This Document (74)

Full Text