This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Real Property
Landlord and Tenant
Unlawful Detainer

Kim Klausner, Trustee Under The Kim Klausner Living Trust, Dated September 27, 2011 v. Aimee Tsao, Lorin Tsao, and Does 1-10, inclusive

Published: Sep. 25, 2020 | Result Date: Jul. 24, 2020 | Filing Date: Oct. 24, 2019 |

Case number: CUD-19-666075 Summary Judgment –  Defense

Judge

Richard B. Ulmer Jr.

Court

San Francisco County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jaimie B. Bombard
(Nixon Peabody)


Defendant

Stephen L. Collier
(Tenderloin Housing Clinic)

Raquel Fox
(Tenderloin Housing Clinic)


Facts

Plaintiff Kim Klausner, Trustee under The Kim Klausner Living Trust Dated September 27, 2011 owns real property in San Francisco, CA. Plaintiff filed an action against defendants Aimee Tsao and Lorin Tsao for unlawful detainer. Defendants were plaintiff's long-time tenants and in possession of the property through a valid lease agreement. Plaintiff's friend James Van Buskirk was also another long-time tenant. In her trust, plaintiff granted her friend a lifetime tenancy for monthly rent that was half the market rate. However, plaintiff sought to take the property off the rental market under the Ellis Act. Plaintiff allowed her friend to live on the property rent free as long as he paid utilities. However, on October 16, 2018, plaintiff served defendants with a notice of termination of tenancy. This notice also included relocation payments as required by Rent Ordinance Section 37.9A. Defendants claimed additional relocation expenses and extension of the date of withdrawal of the premises from the rental market. Defendants did not vacate the property and continued to hold over the property.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that defendants unlawfully held over her property. Plaintiff contended that she filed all required written notices to terminate the tenancy lawfully and complied with relocation payment pursuant to Rent Ordinance Section 37.9A.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied the contentions. Defendants contended that because plaintiff's friend paid rent for half the market price under the trust, plaintiff did not withdraw all accommodations from the rental market as required under the Ellis Act and that plaintiff was trying to circumvent the Ellis Act.

Result

The court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment because plaintiff did not have a bona fide intent to withdraw all the property's accommodations from the rental market.


#135428

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390