360 So Reeves, LLC v. Dutton

Summary

The California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, addressed an unlawful detainer action based on nonpayment of rent. It held that a tenant’s claim that a three-day notice overstated rent is an affirmative defense, and that compliance with Civil Code section 1962 is likewise an affirmative defense rather than an element of the landlord’s prima facie case. The court affirmed the judgment and order denying the motion to vacate or set aside the judgment, and dismissed the appeal from the denial of the motion for new trial as nonappealable.

Holdings

1. A three-day notice to pay rent or quit that includes late fees in the amount demanded overstates the rent due and is void; however, defendant failed to prove that the notice in this case included any late fees.
2. Compliance with Civil Code section 1962 is an affirmative defense for which the tenant bears the burden of proof, not an element of the lessor's prima facie unlawful detainer case.
3. Defendant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that plaintiff violated section 1962, so the judgment was affirmed.
4. The denial of a motion for new trial is not independently appealable.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the three-day notice to pay rent or quit was invalid because it overstated the rent due by including late fees.
2. Whether compliance with Civil Code section 1962 is an element of the lessor's prima facie unlawful detainer case or an affirmative defense borne by the tenant.
3. Whether defendant proved plaintiff failed to comply with Civil Code section 1962.
4. Whether the appeal from the denial of defendant's motion for new trial was appealable.

Disposition

other