Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles etc. v. City of Los Angeles (2026)

Citation: Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles etc. v. City of Los Angeles (2026)
Parent Document: Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles etc. v. City of Los Angeles (2026)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2026-05-14
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10859038/apartment-assn-of-los-angeles-... ↗

Full Text

1,255 chars

20
payment altogether.” This case does not present those
circumstances.
       Further, AAGLA concedes that the Eviction Threshold
Ordinance itself “does not eliminate nonpayment of rent as a
basis for eviction, but rather delays the commencement of
eviction until after the threshold is reached.” The question of
whether a city may eliminate a default in the payment of rent as
a basis for eviction is not before us, and we limit our decision to
the ordinance at issue here. (See Fisher, supra, 37 Cal.3d at
p. 691, fn. 52 [declining to address future implications of
ordinance, where question is “not before us at this time”].) As a
substantive regulation of the basis for eviction in the City of Los
Angeles, the ordinance squarely falls within the City’s broad
police power. (See SFAA 2018, supra, 20 Cal.App.5th at p. 516
[“ ‘municipalities may by ordinance limit the substantive grounds
for eviction by specifying that a landlord may gain possession of a
rental unit only on certain limited grounds’ ”]; Birkenfeld, supra,
17 Cal.3d at p. 140 [a city’s constitutional police power within its
own territory, although “subject to displacement by general state
law,” is otherwise “as broad as the police power exercisable by the
Legislature itself”].)

Other Sections in This Document (77)

Full Text