Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

§ 1805

Citation
§ 1805
Parent Document
Action Apartment Ass'n v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 114 Cal. Rptr. 2d 412 (2002)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2002-01-03

Other Sections in This Document (232)

Full Text

722 chars
8 Cal.4th 216, that courts will attempt to micromanage ratemaking schemes is not present in this case. The sole question before us is whether, for purposes of a demurrer, the Association has stated a valid takings claim by alleging that landlords cannot be forced to pay 3 percent interest on security deposits while banks pay a lower rate. The challenged regulations are not the product of a hopelessly complex process. Nor is the Association mounting a piecemeal assault on the Board’s methodology. On the contrary, the inquiry into the validity of the 3 percent interest regulations is quite narrow; it does not involve the NOI formula or the substantial data analyzed under that formula. If anything, it is the Board’s