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) 1.
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

1,321 chars

1.    The Costa-Hawkins Act
       As we also recently summarized in Pasadena, supra,
117 Cal.App.5th at page 231, the Costa-Hawkins Act was enacted
in 1995 “ ‘to relieve landlords from some of the burdens of ‘strict’
and ‘extreme’ rent control, which the proponents of [the] Costa-
Hawkins [Act] contended unduly and unfairly interfered with the
free market.’ ” (Pasadena, at p. 231; accord, Apartment Assn. of
Los Angeles County, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (2009)
173 Cal.App.4th 13, 30 (Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles County),
italics omitted; NCR Properties, LLC v. City of Berkeley (2023)
89 Cal.App.5th 39, 47 (NCR Properties).)
       As relevant here, Civil Code section 1954.52 exempts from
local rent control laws certain residential property—including
single-family homes and rental units that have certificates of
occupancy issued after February 1, 1995—thus authorizing
landlords to “adjust the rent on such property at will.” (DeZerega
v. Meggs (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 28, 41; see Civ. Code, § 1954.52,
subd. (a) [“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an owner
of residential real property may establish the initial and all
subsequent rental rates for a dwelling or a unit” in certain
circumstances]; Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles County, supra,
173 Cal.App.4th at p. 24 [“Civil Code section 1954.52,

Other Sections in This Document (77)

Full Text