image of spinning marijuana leaf
palmspringsbum
Morongo Valley
Eviction
Post Trial Brief of Defendant CMB 11535 6
Home
Timeline
Felony Cultivation
Eviction
HUD/DFEH Complaint
Post Trial Brief of Defendant CMB 11535
July 07, 2004 - page 6

1 tenant from a landlord's arbitrary retaliatory conduct in all matters relating to a tenant's disability.

2 A landlord may not evict a tenant for arbitrary reasons (Swann v. Burkett (1962) 209 CA2d 685,

3 26 CR 286). The tenant may raise arbitrary retaliatory conduct under the Unruh Act as a defense to

4 an unlawful detainer action (Marina Point Ltd. v. Wolfson (1982) 30 CA3d 721 9, 14).

5 On February 17, 2004, Defendant prevailed in the Unlawful Detainer case that was filed

6 against him by his landlord, Bonita Millard. Civil Code Section 1942.5 states that "if the lessor

7 retaliates against the lessee because of the exercise by the lessee of his rights under this chapter ... and

8 if the lessee is not in default as to the payment of his rent, the lessor may not recover possession of

9 a dwelling in any action or proceeding...within 180 days after the filing of appropriate documents

10 commencing a judicial proceeding involving the issue of tenantability". The Defendant is, therefore,

11 entitled to a six month window of protection under Civil Code Section 1942.5 from being retaliated

12 against after he prevailed during the unlawful detainer proceeding on February 17, 2004.

13 VII.

14 ARGUMENT

15 MIXED MOTIVE EVICTIONS

16 It is defendant's primary position that he has satisfactorily established the fact that the

17 Plaintiff was solely motivated to evict the Defendant because of his marijuana use and cultivation.

18 However, if the court is inclined to find that the Plaintiff was only "partially" motivated to evict the

19 Defendant because of his marijuana use and cultivation, then the court must still rule in favor of the

20 Defendant. An improper motive, although accompanied by a proper motive still bars the Plaintiff

21 from evicting the Defendant. ADVISORY: The law in this area is unsettled. See California Eviction

22 Defense Manual 2d Ed., CEB §16.22.

23 VIII.

24 ARGUMENT

25 FOUR CORNERS OF COMPLAINT/NOTICE (NO NEPHEW/FEAR)

26 The Defendant was served by the Plaintiff with a Sixty Day Notice to Terminate Tenancy on

27

28 POST TRIAL BRIEF 6

copyright © 2003-2015 J. Craig Canada aka palmspringsbum.
Commercial use prohibited without consent. All rights reserved.