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

Small Property Owners v. City & County of San Francisco, 47 Cal. Rptr. 3d 121 (2006)

Citation
Small Property Owners v. City & County of San Francisco, 47 Cal. Rptr. 3d 121 (2006)
Parent Document
Small Property Owners v. City & County of San Francisco, 47 Cal. Rptr. 3d 121 (2006)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2006-08-09

Other Sections in This Document (187)

Full Text

644 chars
landlords to place security deposits into funds that paid interest at a rate less than what landlords had to pay to their tenants, while the San Francisco Ordinance did not. Thus, the ordinance in Santa Monica might be said to have forced individual landlords to bear more than their fair share of a supposed public obligation to ensure that tenants obtain a reasonable rate of interest on their security deposits. The same conclusion cannot be drawn in the matter before us, in light of the freedom San Francisco landlords had to invest the funds in accounts with a higher return, as well as the evidence that the fixed 5 percent rate was less