Archive | eviction RSS feed for this section

Getting the 50,000 or three times the actual damages after Foreclosure

16 Oct

Getting the 50,000 or three times the actual damages

sanctions-604x270 (b) After a trustee’s deed upon sale has been recorded, a mortgage
servicer, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent shall
be liable to a borrower for actual economic damages pursuant to
Section 3281, resulting from a material violation of Section 2923.55,
2923.6, 2923.7, 2924.9, 2924.10, 2924.11, or 2924.17 by that
mortgage servicer, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized
agent where the violation was not corrected and remedied prior to the
recordation of the trustee’s deed upon sale. If the court finds that
the material violation was intentional or reckless, or resulted from
willful misconduct by a mortgage servicer, mortgagee, trustee,
beneficiary, or authorized agent, the court may award the borrower
the greater of treble actual damages or statutory damages of fifty
thousand dollars ($50,000).

2923.55. (a) A mortgage servicer, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary,
or authorized agent may not record a notice of default pursuant to
Section 2924 until all of the following:
(1) The mortgage servicer has satisfied the requirements of
paragraph (1) of subdivision (b).
(2) Either 30 days after initial contact is made as required by
paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) or 30 days after satisfying the due
diligence requirements as described in subdivision (f).
(3) The mortgage servicer complies with subdivision (c) of Section
2923.6, if the borrower has provided a complete application as
defined in subdivision (h) of Section 2923.6.
(b) (1) As specified in subdivision (a), a mortgage servicer shall
send the following information in writing to the borrower:
(A) A statement that if the borrower is a servicemember or a
dependent of a servicemember, he or she may be entitled to certain
protections under the federal Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (50
U.S.C. Appen. Sec. 501 et seq.) regarding the servicemember’s
interest rate and the risk of foreclosure, and counseling for covered
servicemembers that is available at agencies such as Military
OneSource and Armed Forces Legal Assistance.
(B) A statement that the borrower may request the following:
(i) A copy of the borrower’s promissory note or other evidence of
indebtedness.
(ii) A copy of the borrower’s deed of trust or mortgage.
(iii) A copy of any assignment, if applicable, of the borrower’s
mortgage or deed of trust required to demonstrate the right of the
mortgage servicer to foreclose.
(iv) A copy of the borrower’s payment history since the borrower
was last less than 60 days past due.
(2) A mortgage servicer shall contact the borrower in person or by
telephone in order to assess the borrower’s financial situation and
explore options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure. During the
initial contact, the mortgage servicer shall advise the borrower that
he or she has the right to request a subsequent meeting and, if
requested, the mortgage servicer shall schedule the meeting to occur
within 14 days. The assessment of the borrower’s financial situation
and discussion of options may occur during the first contact, or at
the subsequent meeting scheduled for that purpose. In either case,
the borrower shall be provided the toll-free telephone number made
available by the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) to find a HUD-certified housing counseling agency.
Any meeting may occur telephonically.
(c) A notice of default recorded pursuant to Section 2924 shall
include a declaration that the mortgage servicer has contacted the
borrower, has tried with due diligence to contact the borrower as
required by this section, or that no contact was required because the
individual did not meet the definition of “borrower” pursuant to
subdivision (c) of Section 2920.5.
(d) A mortgage servicer’s loss mitigation personnel may
participate by telephone during any contact required by this section.
(e) A borrower may designate, with consent given in writing, a
HUD-certified housing counseling agency, attorney, or other adviser
to discuss with the mortgage servicer, on the borrower’s behalf, the
borrower’s financial situation and options for the borrower to avoid
foreclosure. That contact made at the direction of the borrower shall
satisfy the contact requirements of paragraph (2) of subdivision
(b). Any foreclosure prevention alternative offered at the meeting by
the mortgage servicer is subject to approval by the borrower.
(f) A notice of default may be recorded pursuant to Section 2924
when a mortgage servicer has not contacted a borrower as required by
paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), provided that the failure to
contact the borrower occurred despite the due diligence of the
mortgage servicer. For purposes of this section, “due diligence”
shall require and mean all of the following:
(1) A mortgage servicer shall first attempt to contact a borrower
by sending a first-class letter that includes the toll-free telephone
number made available by HUD to find a HUD-certified housing
counseling agency.
(2) (A) After the letter has been sent, the mortgage servicer
shall attempt to contact the borrower by telephone at least three
times at different hours and on different days. Telephone calls shall
be made to the primary telephone number on file.
(B) A mortgage servicer may attempt to contact a borrower using an
automated system to dial borrowers, provided that, if the telephone
call is answered, the call is connected to a live representative of
the mortgage servicer.
(C) A mortgage servicer satisfies the telephone contact
requirements of this paragraph if it determines, after attempting
contact pursuant to this paragraph, that the borrower’s primary
telephone number and secondary telephone number or numbers on file,
if any, have been disconnected.
(3) If the borrower does not respond within two weeks after the
telephone call requirements of paragraph (2) have been satisfied, the
mortgage servicer shall then send a certified letter, with return
receipt requested, that includes the toll-free telephone number made
available by HUD to find a HUD-certified housing counseling agency.
(4) The mortgage servicer shall provide a means for the borrower
to contact it in a timely manner, including a toll-free telephone
number that will provide access to a live representative during
business hours.
(5) The mortgage servicer has posted a prominent link on the
homepage of its Internet Web site, if any, to the following
information:
(A) Options that may be available to borrowers who are unable to
afford their mortgage payments and who wish to avoid foreclosure, and
instructions to borrowers advising them on steps to take to explore
those options.
(B) A list of financial documents borrowers should collect and be
prepared to present to the mortgage servicer when discussing options
for avoiding foreclosure.
(C) A toll-free telephone number for borrowers who wish to discuss
options for avoiding foreclosure with their mortgage servicer.
(D) The toll-free telephone number made available by HUD to find a
HUD-certified housing counseling agency.
(g) This section shall not apply to entities described in
subdivision (b) of Section 2924.18.
(h) This section shall apply only to mortgages or deeds of trust
described in Section 2924.15.
(i) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1,
2018, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2018, deletes or extends
that date.

2923.6. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that any duty that
mortgage servicers may have to maximize net present value under their
pooling and servicing agreements is owed to all parties in a loan
pool, or to all investors under a pooling and servicing agreement,
not to any particular party in the loan pool or investor under a
pooling and servicing agreement, and that a mortgage servicer acts in
the best interests of all parties to the loan pool or investors in
the pooling and servicing agreement if it agrees to or implements a
loan modification or workout plan for which both of the following
apply:
(1) The loan is in payment default, or payment default is
reasonably foreseeable.
(2) Anticipated recovery under the loan modification or workout
plan exceeds the anticipated recovery through foreclosure on a net
present value basis.
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature that the mortgage servicer
offer the borrower a loan modification or workout plan if such a
modification or plan is consistent with its contractual or other
authority.
(c) If a borrower submits a complete application for a first lien
loan modification offered by, or through, the borrower’s mortgage
servicer, a mortgage servicer, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or
authorized agent shall not record a notice of default or notice of
sale, or conduct a trustee’s sale, while the complete first lien loan
modification application is pending. A mortgage servicer, mortgagee,
trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent shall not record a notice
of default or notice of sale or conduct a trustee’s sale until any of
the following occurs:
(1) The mortgage servicer makes a written determination that the
borrower is not eligible for a first lien loan modification, and any
appeal period pursuant to subdivision (d) has expired.
(2) The borrower does not accept an offered first lien loan
modification within 14 days of the offer.
(3) The borrower accepts a written first lien loan modification,
but defaults on, or otherwise breaches the borrower’s obligations
under, the first lien loan modification.
(d) If the borrower’s application for a first lien loan
modification is denied, the borrower shall have at least 30 days from
the date of the written denial to appeal the denial and to provide
evidence that the mortgage servicer’s determination was in error.
(e) If the borrower’s application for a first lien loan
modification is denied, the mortgage servicer, mortgagee, trustee,
beneficiary, or authorized agent shall not record a notice of default
or, if a notice of default has already been recorded, record a
notice of sale or conduct a trustee’s sale until the later of:
(1) Thirty-one days after the borrower is notified in writing of
the denial.
(2) If the borrower appeals the denial pursuant to subdivision
(d), the later of 15 days after the denial of the appeal or 14 days
after a first lien loan modification is offered after appeal but
declined by the borrower, or, if a first lien loan modification is
offered and accepted after appeal, the date on which the borrower
fails to timely submit the first payment or otherwise breaches the
terms of the offer.
(f) Following the denial of a first lien loan modification
application, the mortgage servicer shall send a written notice to the
borrower identifying the reasons for denial, including the
following:
(1) The amount of time from the date of the denial letter in which
the borrower may request an appeal of the denial of the first lien
loan modification and instructions regarding how to appeal the
denial.
(2) If the denial was based on investor disallowance, the specific
reasons for the investor disallowance.
(3) If the denial is the result of a net present value
calculation, the monthly gross income and property value used to
calculate the net present value and a statement that the borrower may
obtain all of the inputs used in the net present value calculation
upon written request to the mortgage servicer.
(4) If applicable, a finding that the borrower was previously
offered a first lien loan modification and failed to successfully
make payments under the terms of the modified loan.
(5) If applicable, a description of other foreclosure prevention
alternatives for which the borrower may be eligible, and a list of
the steps the borrower must take in order to be considered for those
options. If the mortgage servicer has already approved the borrower
for another foreclosure prevention alternative, information necessary
to complete the foreclosure prevention alternative.
(g) In order to minimize the risk of borrowers submitting multiple
applications for first lien loan modifications for the purpose of
delay, the mortgage servicer shall not be obligated to evaluate
applications from borrowers who have already been evaluated or
afforded a fair opportunity to be evaluated for a first lien loan
modification prior to January 1, 2013, or who have been evaluated or
afforded a fair opportunity to be evaluated consistent with the
requirements of this section, unless there has been a material change
in the borrower’s financial circumstances since the date of the
borrower’s previous application and that change is documented by the
borrower and submitted to the mortgage servicer.
(h) For purposes of this section, an application shall be deemed
“complete” when a borrower has supplied the mortgage servicer with
all documents required by the mortgage servicer within the reasonable
timeframes specified by the mortgage servicer.
(i) Subdivisions (c) to (h), inclusive, shall not apply to
entities described in subdivision (b) of Section 2924.18.
(j) This section shall apply only to mortgages or deeds of trust
described in Section 2924.15.
(k) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1,
2018, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2018, deletes or extends
that date.

2923.7. (a) Upon request from a borrower who requests a foreclosure
prevention alternative, the mortgage servicer shall promptly
establish a single point of contact and provide to the borrower one
or more direct means of communication with the single point of
contact.
(b) The single point of contact shall be responsible for doing all
of the following:
(1) Communicating the process by which a borrower may apply for an
available foreclosure prevention alternative and the deadline for
any required submissions to be considered for these options.
(2) Coordinating receipt of all documents associated with
available foreclosure prevention alternatives and notifying the
borrower of any missing documents necessary to complete the
application.
(3) Having access to current information and personnel sufficient
to timely, accurately, and adequately inform the borrower of the
current status of the foreclosure prevention alternative.
(4) Ensuring that a borrower is considered for all foreclosure
prevention alternatives offered by, or through, the mortgage
servicer, if any.
(5) Having access to individuals with the ability and authority to
stop foreclosure proceedings when necessary.
(c) The single point of contact shall remain assigned to the
borrower’s account until the mortgage servicer determines that all
loss mitigation options offered by, or through, the mortgage servicer
have been exhausted or the borrower’s account becomes current.
(d) The mortgage servicer shall ensure that a single point of
contact refers and transfers a borrower to an appropriate supervisor
upon request of the borrower, if the single point of contact has a
supervisor.
(e) For purposes of this section, “single point of contact” means
an individual or team of personnel each of whom has the ability and
authority to perform the responsibilities described in subdivisions
(b) to (d), inclusive. The mortgage servicer shall ensure that each
member of the team is knowledgeable about the borrower’s situation
and current status in the alternatives to foreclosure process.
(f) This section shall apply only to mortgages or deeds of trust
described in Section 2924.15.
(g) (1) This section shall not apply to a depository institution
chartered under state or federal law, a person licensed pursuant to
Division 9 (commencing with Section 22000) or Division 20 (commencing
with Section 50000) of the Financial Code, or a person licensed
pursuant to Part 1 (commencing with Section 10000) of Division 4 of
the Business and Professions Code, that, during its immediately
preceding annual reporting period, as established with its primary
regulator, foreclosed on 175 or fewer residential real properties,
containing no more than four dwelling units, that are located in
California.
(2) Within three months after the close of any calendar year or
annual reporting period as established with its primary regulator
during which an entity or person described in paragraph (1) exceeds
the threshold of 175 specified in paragraph (1), that entity shall
notify its primary regulator, in a manner acceptable to its primary
regulator, and any mortgagor or trustor who is delinquent on a
residential mortgage loan serviced by that entity of the date on
which that entity will be subject to this section, which date shall
be the first day of the first month that is six months after the
close of the calendar year or annual reporting period during which
that entity exceeded the threshold.

2924.9. (a) Unless a borrower has previously exhausted the first
lien loan modification process offered by, or through, his or her
mortgage servicer described in Section 2923.6, within five business
days after recording a notice of default pursuant to Section 2924, a
mortgage servicer that offers one or more foreclosure prevention
alternatives shall send a written communication to the borrower that
includes all of the following information:
(1) That the borrower may be evaluated for a foreclosure
prevention alternative or, if applicable, foreclosure prevention
alternatives.
(2) Whether an application is required to be submitted by the
borrower in order to be considered for a foreclosure prevention
alternative.
(3) The means and process by which a borrower may obtain an
application for a foreclosure prevention alternative.
(b) This section shall not apply to entities described in
subdivision (b) of Section 2924.18.
(c) This section shall apply only to mortgages or deeds of trust
described in Section 2924.15.
(d) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1,
2018, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2018, deletes or extends
that date.

2924.10. (a) When a borrower submits a complete first lien
modification application or any document in connection with a first
lien modification application, the mortgage servicer shall provide
written acknowledgment of the receipt of the documentation within
five business days of receipt. In its initial acknowledgment of
receipt of the loan modification application, the mortgage servicer
shall include the following information:
(1) A description of the loan modification process, including an
estimate of when a decision on the loan modification will be made
after a complete application has been submitted by the borrower and
the length of time the borrower will have to consider an offer of a
loan modification or other foreclosure prevention alternative.
(2) Any deadlines, including deadlines to submit missing
documentation, that would affect the processing of a first lien loan
modification application.
(3) Any expiration dates for submitted documents.
(4) Any deficiency in the borrower’s first lien loan modification
application.
(b) For purposes of this section, a borrower’s first lien loan
modification application shall be deemed to be “complete” when a
borrower has supplied the mortgage servicer with all documents
required by the mortgage servicer within the reasonable timeframes
specified by the mortgage servicer.
(c) This section shall not apply to entities described in
subdivision (b) of Section 2924.18.
(d) This section shall apply only to mortgages or deeds of trust
described in Section 2924.15.
(e) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1,
2018, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2018, deletes or extends
that date.

2924.11. (a) If a foreclosure prevention alternative is approved in
writing prior to the recordation of a notice of default, a mortgage
servicer, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent shall
not record a notice of default under either of the following
circumstances:
(1) The borrower is in compliance with the terms of a written
trial or permanent loan modification, forbearance, or repayment plan.
(2) A foreclosure prevention alternative has been approved in
writing by all parties, including, for example, the first lien
investor, junior lienholder, and mortgage insurer, as applicable, and
proof of funds or financing has been provided to the servicer.
(b) If a foreclosure prevention alternative is approved in writing
after the recordation of a notice of default, a mortgage servicer,
mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent shall not record
a notice of sale or conduct a trustee’s sale under either of the
following circumstances:
(1) The borrower is in compliance with the terms of a written
trial or permanent loan modification, forbearance, or repayment plan.
(2) A foreclosure prevention alternative has been approved in
writing by all parties, including, for example, the first lien
investor, junior lienholder, and mortgage insurer, as applicable, and
proof of funds or financing has been provided to the servicer.
(c) When a borrower accepts an offered first lien loan
modification or other foreclosure prevention alternative, the
mortgage servicer shall provide the borrower with a copy of the fully
executed loan modification agreement or agreement evidencing the
foreclosure prevention alternative following receipt of the executed
copy from the borrower.
(d) A mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent shall record a
rescission of a notice of default or cancel a pending trustee’s sale,
if applicable, upon the borrower executing a permanent foreclosure
prevention alternative. In the case of a short sale, the rescission
or cancellation of the pending trustee’s sale shall occur when the
short sale has been approved by all parties and proof of funds or
financing has been provided to the mortgagee, beneficiary, or
authorized agent.
(e) The mortgage servicer shall not charge any application,
processing, or other fee for a first lien loan modification or other
foreclosure prevention alternative.
(f) The mortgage servicer shall not collect any late fees for
periods during which a complete first lien loan modification
application is under consideration or a denial is being appealed, the
borrower is making timely modification payments, or a foreclosure
prevention alternative is being evaluated or exercised.
(g) If a borrower has been approved in writing for a first lien
loan modification or other foreclosure prevention alternative, and
the servicing of that borrower’s loan is transferred or sold to
another mortgage servicer, the subsequent mortgage servicer shall
continue to honor any previously approved first lien loan
modification or other foreclosure prevention alternative, in
accordance with the provisions of the act that added this section.
(h) This section shall apply only to mortgages or deeds of trust
described in Section 2924.15.
(i) This section shall not apply to entities described in
subdivision (b) of Section 2924.18.
(j) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1,
2018, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2018, deletes or extends
that date.

2924.17. (a) A declaration recorded pursuant to Section 2923.5 or,
until January 1, 2018, pursuant to Section 2923.55, a notice of
default, notice of sale, assignment of a deed of trust, or
substitution of trustee recorded by or on behalf of a mortgage
servicer in connection with a foreclosure subject to the requirements
of Section 2924, or a declaration or affidavit filed in any court
relative to a foreclosure proceeding shall be accurate and complete
and supported by competent and reliable evidence.
(b) Before recording or filing any of the documents described in
subdivision (a), a mortgage servicer shall ensure that it has
reviewed competent and reliable evidence to substantiate the borrower’
s default and the right to foreclose, including the borrower’s loan
status and loan information.
(c) Until January 1, 2018, any mortgage servicer that engages in
multiple and repeated uncorrected violations of subdivision (b) in
recording documents or filing documents in any court relative to a
foreclosure proceeding shall be liable for a civil penalty of up to
seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500) per mortgage or deed of
trust in an action brought by a government entity identified in
Section 17204 of the Business and Professions Code, or in an
administrative proceeding brought by the Department of Business
Oversight or the Bureau of Real Estate against a respective licensee,
in addition to any other remedies available to these entities. This
subdivision shall be inoperative on January 1, 2018.

Tenants in rentals that is forclosed have rights to a new agreement with new owner Civil code 1962 if they evict they are liable wrongful eviction = Punative damages !!!

23 Jul

Civil Code – CIV

DIVISION 3. OBLIGATIONS [1427. – 3272.9.]

( Heading of Division 3 amended by Stats. 1988, Ch. 160, Sec. 14. )

PART 4. OBLIGATIONS ARISING FROM PARTICULAR TRANSACTIONS [1738. – 3272.9.]

( Part 4 enacted 1872. )

TITLE 5. HIRING [1925. – 1997.270.]

( Title 5 enacted 1872. )

 

CHAPTER 4. Identification of Property Owners [1961. – 1962.7.]

( Chapter 4 added by Stats. 1972, Ch. 941. )

 

1961.

This chapter shall apply to every dwelling structure containing one or more units offered to the public for rent or for lease for residential purposes.

(Amended by Stats. 1987, Ch. 769, Sec. 1.)

1962.

(a) Any owner of a dwelling structure specified in Section 1961 or a party signing a rental agreement or lease on behalf of the owner shall do all of the following:

(1) Disclose therein the name, telephone number, and usual street address at which personal service may be effected of each person who is:

(A) Authorized to manage the premises.

(B) An owner of the premises or a person who is authorized to act for and on behalf of the owner for the purpose of service of process and for the purpose of receiving and receipting for all notices and demands.

(2) Disclose therein the name, telephone number, and address of the person or entity to whom rent payments shall be made.

(A) If rent payments may be made personally, the usual days and hours that the person will be available to receive the payments shall also be disclosed.

(B) At the owner’s option, the rental agreement or lease shall instead disclose the number of either:

(i) The account in a financial institution into which rent payments may be made, and the name and street address of the institution; provided that the institution is located within five miles of the rental property.

(ii) The information necessary to establish an electronic funds transfer procedure for paying the rent.

(3) Disclose therein the form or forms in which rent payments are to be made.

(4) Provide a copy of the rental agreement or lease to the tenant within 15 days of its execution by the tenant. Once each calendar year thereafter, upon request by the tenant, the owner or owner’s agent shall provide an additional copy to the tenant within 15 days. If the owner or owner’s agent does not possess the rental agreement or lease or a copy of it, the owner or owner’s agent shall instead furnish the tenant with a written statement stating that fact and containing the information required by paragraphs (1), (2), and (3).

(b) In the case of an oral rental agreement, the owner, or a person acting on behalf of the owner for the receipt of rent or otherwise, shall furnish the tenant, within 15 days of the agreement, with a written statement containing the information required by paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of subdivision (a). Once each calendar year thereafter, upon request by the tenant, the owner or owner’s agent shall provide an additional copy of the statement to the tenant within 15 days.

(c) The information required by this section shall be kept current and this section shall extend to and be enforceable against any successor owner or manager, who shall comply with this section within 15 days of succeeding the previous owner or manager. A successor owner or manager shall not serve a notice pursuant to paragraph (2) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure or otherwise evict a tenant for nonpayment of rent that accrued during the period of noncompliance by a successor owner or manager with this subdivision. Nothing in this subdivision shall relieve the tenant of any liability for unpaid rent.

(d) A party who enters into a rental agreement on behalf of the owner who fails to comply with this section is deemed an agent of each person who is an owner:

(1) For the purpose of service of process and receiving and receipting for notices and demands.

(2) For the purpose of performing the obligations of the owner under law and under the rental agreement.

(3) For the purpose of receiving rental payments, which may be made in cash, by check, by money order, or in any form previously accepted by the owner or owner’s agent, unless the form of payment has been specified in the oral or written agreement, or the tenant has been notified by the owner in writing that a particular form of payment is unacceptable.

(e) Nothing in this section limits or excludes the liability of any undisclosed owner.

(f) If the address provided by the owner does not allow for personal delivery, then it shall be conclusively presumed that upon the mailing of any rent or notice to the owner by the tenant to the name and address provided, the notice or rent is deemed receivable by the owner on the date posted, if the tenant can show proof of mailing to the name and address provided by the owner.

(Amended by Stats. 2012, Ch. 695, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2013.)

1962.5.

(a) Notwithstanding subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 1962, the information required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1962 to be disclosed to a tenant may, instead of being disclosed in the manner described in subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 1962, be disclosed by the following method:

(1) In each dwelling structure containing an elevator a printed or typewritten notice containing the information required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1962 shall be placed in every elevator and in one other conspicuous place.

(2) In each structure not containing an elevator, a printed or typewritten notice containing the information required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1962 shall be placed in at least two conspicuous places.

(3) In the case of a single unit dwelling structure, the information to be disclosed under this section may be disclosed by complying with either paragraph (1) or (2).

(b) Except as provided in subdivision (a), all the provisions of Section 1962 shall be applicable.

(Amended by Stats. 2001, Ch. 729, Sec. 4. Effective January 1, 2002.)

1962.7.

In the event an owner, successor owner, manager, or agent specified in Section 1961 fails to comply with the requirements of this chapter, service of process by a tenant with respect to a dispute arising out of the tenancy may be made by registered or certified mail sent to the address at which rent is paid, in which case the provisions of Section 1013 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply.

(Amended by Stats. 2001, Ch. 729, Sec. 5. Effective January 1, 2002.)

1159.  Every person is guilty of a forcible entry who either:
   1. By breaking open doors, windows, or other parts of a house, or
by any kind of violence or circumstance of terror enters upon or into
any real property; or,
   2. Who, after entering peaceably upon real property, turns out by
force, threats, or menacing conduct, the party in possession.
   The "party in possession" means any person who hires real property
and includes a boarder or lodger, except those persons whose
occupancy is described in subdivision (b) of Section 1940 of the
Civil Code.

1160.  Every person is guilty of a forcible detainer who either:
   1. By force, or by menaces and threats of violence, unlawfully
holds and keeps the possession of any real property, whether the same
was acquired peaceably or otherwise; or,
   2. Who, in the night-time, or during the absence of the occupant
of any lands, unlawfully enters upon real property, and who, after
demand made for the surrender thereof, for the period of five days,
refuses to surrender the same to such former occupant.
   The occupant of real property, within the meaning of this
subdivision, is one who, within five days preceding such unlawful
entry, was in the peaceable and undisturbed possession of such lands.

1161.  A tenant of real property, for a term less than life, or the
executor or administrator of his or her estate heretofore qualified
and now acting or hereafter to be qualified and act, is guilty of
unlawful detainer:
   1. When he or she continues in possession, in person or by
subtenant, of the property, or any part thereof, after the expiration
of the term for which it is let to him or her; provided the
expiration is of a nondefault nature however brought about without
the permission of his or her landlord, or the successor in estate of
his or her landlord, if applicable; including the case where the
person to be removed became the occupant of the premises as a
servant, employee, agent, or licensee and the relation of master and
servant, or employer and employee, or principal and agent, or
licensor and licensee, has been lawfully terminated or the time fixed
for occupancy by the agreement between the parties has expired; but
nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as preventing the
removal of the occupant in any other lawful manner; but in case of a
tenancy at will, it must first be terminated by notice, as prescribed
in the Civil Code.
   2. When he or she continues in possession, in person or by
subtenant, without the permission of his or her landlord, or the
successor in estate of his or her landlord, if applicable, after
default in the payment of rent, pursuant to the lease or agreement
under which the property is held, and three days' notice, in writing,
requiring its payment, stating the amount which is due, the name,
telephone number, and address of the person to whom the rent payment
shall be made, and, if payment may be made personally, the usual days
and hours that person will be available to receive the payment
(provided that, if the address does not allow for personal delivery,
then it shall be conclusively presumed that upon the mailing of any
rent or notice to the owner by the tenant to the name and address
provided, the notice or rent is deemed received by the owner on the
date posted, if the tenant can show proof of mailing to the name and
address provided by the owner), or the number of an account in a
financial institution into which the rental payment may be made, and
the name and street address of the institution (provided that the
institution is located within five miles of the rental property), or
if an electronic funds transfer procedure has been previously
established, that payment may be made pursuant to that procedure, or
possession of the property, shall have been served upon him or her
and if there is a subtenant in actual occupation of the premises,
also upon the subtenant.
   The notice may be served at any time within one year after the
rent becomes due. In all cases of tenancy upon agricultural lands,
where the tenant has held over and retained possession for more than
60 days after the expiration of the term without any demand of
possession or notice to quit by the landlord or the successor in
estate of his or her landlord, if applicable, he or she shall be
deemed to be holding by permission of the landlord or successor in
estate of his or her landlord, if applicable, and shall be entitled
to hold under the terms of the lease for another full year, and shall
not be guilty of an unlawful detainer during that year, and the
holding over for that period shall be taken and construed as a
consent on the part of a tenant to hold for another year.
   3. When he or she continues in possession, in person or by
subtenant, after a neglect or failure to perform other conditions or
covenants of the lease or agreement under which the property is held,
including any covenant not to assign or sublet, than the one for the
payment of rent, and three days' notice, in writing, requiring the
performance of such conditions or covenants, or the possession of the
property, shall have been served upon him or her, and if there is a
subtenant in actual occupation of the premises, also, upon the
subtenant. Within three days after the service of the notice, the
tenant, or any subtenant in actual occupation of the premises, or any
mortgagee of the term, or other person interested in its
continuance, may perform the conditions or covenants of the lease or
pay the stipulated rent, as the case may be, and thereby save the
lease from forfeiture; provided, if the conditions and covenants of
the lease, violated by the lessee, cannot afterward be performed,
then no notice, as last prescribed herein, need be given to the
lessee or his or her subtenant, demanding the performance of the
violated conditions or covenants of the lease.
   A tenant may take proceedings, similar to those prescribed in this
chapter, to obtain possession of the premises let to a subtenant or
held by a servant, employee, agent, or licensee, in case of his or
her unlawful detention of the premises underlet to him or her or held
by him or her.
   4. Any tenant, subtenant, or executor or administrator of his or
her estate heretofore qualified and now acting, or hereafter to be
qualified and act, assigning or subletting or committing waste upon
the demised premises, contrary to the conditions or covenants of his
or her lease, or maintaining, committing, or permitting the
maintenance or commission of a nuisance upon the demised premises or
using the premises for an unlawful purpose, thereby terminates the
lease, and the landlord, or his or her successor in estate, shall
upon service of three days' notice to quit upon the person or persons
in possession, be entitled to restitution of possession of the
demised premises under this chapter. For purposes of this
subdivision, a person who commits or maintains a public nuisance as
described in Section 3482.8 of the Civil Code, or who commits an
offense described in subdivision (c) of Section 3485 of the Civil
Code, or subdivision (c) of Section 3486 of the Civil Code, or uses
the premises to further the purpose of that offense shall be deemed
to have committed a nuisance upon the premises.
   5. When he or she gives written notice as provided in Section 1946
of the Civil Code of his or her intention to terminate the hiring of
the real property, or makes a written offer to surrender which is
accepted in writing by the landlord, but fails to deliver possession
at the time specified in that written notice, without the permission
of his or her landlord, or the successor in estate of the landlord,
if applicable.
   As used in this section, tenant includes any person who hires real
property except those persons whose occupancy is described in
subdivision (b) of Section 1940 of the Civil Code.
   This section shall become operative on January 1, 2012.

1161.1.  With respect to application of Section 1161 in cases of
possession of commercial real property after default in the payment
of rent:
   (a) If the amount stated in the notice provided to the tenant
pursuant to subdivision (2) of Section 1161 is clearly identified by
the notice as an estimate and the amount claimed is not in fact
correct, but it is determined upon the trial or other judicial
determination that rent was owing, and the amount claimed in the
notice was reasonably estimated, the tenant shall be subject to
judgment for possession and the actual amount of rent and other sums
found to be due. However, if (1) upon receipt of such a notice
claiming an amount identified by the notice as an estimate, the
tenant tenders to the landlord within the time for payment required
by the notice, the amount which the tenant has reasonably estimated
to be due and (2) if at trial it is determined that the amount of
rent then due was the amount tendered by the tenant or a lesser
amount, the tenant shall be deemed the prevailing party for all
purposes. If the court determines that the amount so tendered by the
tenant was less than the amount due, but was reasonably estimated,
the tenant shall retain the right to possession if the tenant pays to
the landlord within five days of the effective date of the judgment
(1) the amount previously tendered if it had not been previously
accepted, (2) the difference between the amount tendered and the
amount determined by the court to be due, and (3) any other sums as
ordered by the court.
   (b) If the landlord accepts a partial payment of rent, including
any payment pursuant to subdivision (a), after serving notice
pursuant to Section 1161, the landlord, without any further notice to
the tenant, may commence and pursue an action under this chapter to
recover the difference between the amount demanded in that notice and
the payment actually received, and this shall be specified in the
complaint.
   (c) If the landlord accepts a partial payment of rent after filing
the complaint pursuant to Section 1166, the landlord's acceptance of
the partial payment is evidence only of that payment, without waiver
of any rights or defenses of any of the parties. The landlord shall
be entitled to amend the complaint to reflect the partial payment
without creating a necessity for the filing of an additional answer
or other responsive pleading by the tenant, and without prior leave
of court, and such an amendment shall not delay the matter from
proceeding. However, this subdivision shall apply only if the
landlord provides actual notice to the tenant that acceptance of the
partial rent payment does not constitute a waiver of any rights,
including any right the landlord may have to recover possession of
the property.
   (d) "Commercial real property" as used in this section, means all
real property in this state except dwelling units made subject to
Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 1940) of Title 5 of Part 4 of
Division 3 of the Civil Code, mobilehomes as defined in Section 798.3
of the Civil Code, or recreational vehicles as defined in Section
799.24 of the Civil Code.
   (e) For the purposes of this section, there is a presumption
affecting the burden of proof that the amount of rent claimed or
tendered is reasonably estimated if, in relation to the amount
determined to be due upon the trial or other judicial determination
of that issue, the amount claimed or tendered was no more than 20
percent more or less than the amount determined to be due. However,
if the rent due is contingent upon information primarily within the
knowledge of the one party to the lease and that information has not
been furnished to, or has not accurately been furnished to, the other
party, the court shall consider that fact in determining the
reasonableness of the amount of rent claimed or tendered pursuant to
subdivision (a).

1161.2.  (a) The clerk may allow access to limited civil case
records filed under this chapter, including the court file, index,
and register of actions, only as follows:
   (1) To a party to the action, including a party's attorney.
   (2) To any person who provides the clerk with the names of at
least one plaintiff and one defendant and the address of the
premises, including the apartment or unit number, if any.
   (3) To a resident of the premises who provides the clerk with the
name of one of the parties or the case number and shows proof of
residency.
   (4) To any person by order of the court, which may be granted ex
parte, on a showing of good cause.
   (5) Except as provided in paragraph (6), to any other person 60
days after the complaint has been filed, unless a defendant prevails
in the action within 60 days of the filing of the complaint, in which
case the clerk may not allow access to any court records in the
action, except as provided in paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive.
   (6) In the case of a complaint involving residential property
based on Section 1161a as indicated in the caption of the complaint,
as required in subdivision (c) of Section 1166, to any other person,
if 60 days have elapsed since the complaint was filed with the court,
and, as of that date, judgment against all defendants has been
entered for the plaintiff, after a trial. If judgment is not entered
under the conditions described in this paragraph, the clerk shall not
allow access to any court records in the action, except as provided
in paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive.
   (b) For purposes of this section, "good cause" includes, but is
not limited to, the gathering of newsworthy facts by a person
described in Section 1070 of the Evidence Code. It is the intent of
the Legislature that a simple procedure be established to request the
ex parte order described in subdivision (a).
   (c) Upon the filing of any case so restricted, the court clerk
shall mail notice to each defendant named in the action. The notice
shall be mailed to the address provided in the complaint. The notice
shall contain a statement that an unlawful detainer complaint
(eviction action) has been filed naming that party as a defendant,
and that access to the court file will be delayed for 60 days except
to a party, an attorney for one of the parties, or any other person
who (1) provides to the clerk the names of at least one plaintiff and
one defendant in the action and provides to the clerk the address,
including any applicable apartment, unit, or space number, of the
subject premises, or (2) provides to the clerk the name of one of the
parties in the action or the case number and can establish through
proper identification that he or she lives at the subject premises.
The notice shall also contain a statement that access to the court
index, register of actions, or other records is not permitted until
60 days after the complaint is filed, except pursuant to an order
upon a showing of good cause therefor. The notice shall contain on
its face the following information:
   (1) The name and telephone number of the county bar association.
   (2) The name and telephone number of any entity that requests
inclusion on the notice and demonstrates to the satisfaction of the
court that it has been certified by the State Bar as a lawyer
referral service and maintains a panel of attorneys qualified in the
practice of landlord-tenant law pursuant to the minimum standards for
a lawyer referral service established by the State Bar and Section
6155 of the Business and Professions Code.
   (3) The following statement:

   "The State Bar of California certifies lawyer referral services in
California and publishes a list of certified lawyer referral
services organized by county. To locate a lawyer referral service in
your county, go to the State Bar's website at www.calbar.ca.gov or
call 1-866-442-2529."

   (4) The name and telephone number of an office or offices funded
by the federal Legal Services Corporation or qualified legal services
projects that receive funds distributed pursuant to Section 6216 of
the Business and Professions Code that provide legal services to
low-income persons in the county in which the action is filed. The
notice shall state that these numbers may be called for legal advice
regarding the case. The notice shall be issued between 24 and 48
hours of the filing of the complaint, excluding weekends and
holidays. One copy of the notice shall be addressed to "all occupants"
and mailed separately to the subject premises. The notice shall not
constitute service of the summons and complaint.
   (d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the court shall
charge an additional fee of fifteen dollars ($15) for filing a first
appearance by the plaintiff. This fee shall be added to the uniform
filing fee for actions filed under this chapter.
   (e) This section does not apply to a case that seeks to terminate
a mobilehome park tenancy if the statement of the character of the
proceeding in the caption of the complaint clearly indicates that the
complaint seeks termination of a mobilehome park tenancy.

1161.3.  (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), a landlord shall
not terminate a tenancy or fail to renew a tenancy based upon an act
or acts against a tenant or a tenant's household member that
constitute domestic violence as defined in Section 6211 of the Family
Code, sexual assault as defined in Section 1219, stalking as defined
in Section 1708.7 of the Civil Code or Section 646.9 of the Penal
Code, or abuse of an elder or a dependent adult as defined in Section
15610.07 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, if both of the
following apply:
   (1) The act or acts of domestic violence, sexual assault,
stalking, or abuse of an elder or a dependent adult have been
documented by one of the following:
   (A) A temporary restraining order, emergency protective order, or
protective order lawfully issued within the last 180 days pursuant to
Section 527.6, Part 3 (commencing with Section 6240), Part 4
(commencing with Section 6300), or Part 5 (commencing with Section
6400) of Division 10 of the Family Code, Section 136.2 of the Penal
Code, or Section 213.5 or 15657.03 of the Welfare and Institutions
Code that protects the tenant or household member from domestic
violence, sexual assault, stalking, or abuse of an elder or a
dependent adult.
   (B) A copy of a written report, written within the last 180 days,
by a peace officer employed by a state or local law enforcement
agency acting in his or her official capacity, stating that the
tenant or household member has filed a report alleging that he or she
or the household member is a victim of domestic violence, sexual
assault, stalking, or abuse of an elder or a dependent adult.
   (2) The person against whom the protection order has been issued
or who was named in the police report of the act or acts of domestic
violence, sexual assault, stalking, or abuse of an elder or dependent
adult is not a tenant of the same dwelling unit as the tenant or
household member.
   (b) A landlord may terminate or decline to renew a tenancy after
the tenant has availed himself or herself of the protections afforded
by subdivision (a) if both of the following apply:
   (1) Either of the following:
   (A) The tenant allows the person against whom the protection order
has been issued or who was named in the police report of the act or
acts of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, or abuse of an
elder or a dependent adult to visit the property.
   (B) The landlord reasonably believes that the presence of the
person against whom the protection order has been issued or who was
named in the police report of the act or acts of domestic violence,
sexual assault, stalking, or abuse of an elder or dependent adult
poses a physical threat to other tenants, guests, invitees, or
licensees, or to a tenant's right to quiet possession pursuant to
Section 1927 of the Civil Code.
   (2) The landlord previously gave at least three days' notice to
the tenant to correct a violation of paragraph (1).
   (c) Notwithstanding any provision in the lease to the contrary,
the landlord shall not be liable to any other tenants for any action
that arises due to the landlord's compliance with this section.
   (d) For the purposes of this section, "tenant" means tenant,
subtenant, lessee, or sublessee.
   (e) The Judicial Council shall, on or before January 1, 2014,
develop a new form or revise an existing form that may be used by a
party to assert in the responsive pleading the grounds set forth in
this section as an affirmative defense to an unlawful detainer
action.

1161.5.  When the notice required by Section 1161 states that the
lessor or the landlord may elect to declare the forfeiture of the
lease or rental agreement, that declaration shall be nullified and
the lease or rental agreement shall remain in effect if the lessee or
tenant performs within three days after service of the notice or if
the breach is waived by the lessor or the landlord after service of
the notice.

1161a.  (a) As used in this section:
   (1) "Manufactured home" has the same meaning as provided in
Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.
   (2) "Mobilehome" has the same meaning as provided in Section 18008
of the Health and Safety Code.
   (3) "Floating home" has the same meaning as provided in
subdivision (d) of Section 18075.55 of the Health and Safety Code.
   (b) In any of the following cases, a person who holds over and
continues in possession of a manufactured home, mobilehome, floating
home, or real property after a three-day written notice to quit the
property has been served upon the person, or if there is a subtenant
in actual occupation of the premises, also upon such subtenant, as
prescribed in Section 1162, may be removed therefrom as prescribed in
this chapter:
   (1) Where the property has been sold pursuant to a writ of
execution against such person, or a person under whom such person
claims, and the title under the sale has been duly perfected.
   (2) Where the property has been sold pursuant to a writ of sale,
upon the foreclosure by proceedings taken as prescribed in this code
of a mortgage, or under an express power of sale contained therein,
executed by such person, or a person under whom such person claims,
and the title under the foreclosure has been duly perfected.
   (3) Where the property has been sold in accordance with Section
2924 of the Civil Code, under a power of sale contained in a deed of
trust executed by such person, or a person under whom such person
claims, and the title under the sale has been duly perfected.
   (4) Where the property has been sold by such person, or a person
under whom such person claims, and the title under the sale has been
duly perfected.
   (5) Where the property has been sold in accordance with Section
18037.5 of the Health and Safety Code under the default provisions of
a conditional sale contract or security agreement executed by such
person, or a person under whom such person claims, and the title
under the sale has been duly perfected.
   (c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision (b), a tenant or
subtenant in possession of a rental housing unit which has been sold
by reason of any of the causes enumerated in subdivision (b), who
rents or leases the rental housing unit either on a periodic basis
from week to week, month to month, or other interval, or for a fixed
period of time, shall be given written notice to quit pursuant to
Section 1162, at least as long as the term of hiring itself but not
exceeding 30 days, before the tenant or subtenant may be removed
therefrom as prescribed in this chapter.
   (d) For the purpose of subdivision (c), "rental housing unit"
means any structure or any part thereof which is rented or offered
for rent for residential occupancy in this state.

1161b.  (a) Notwithstanding Section 1161a, a tenant or subtenant in
possession of a rental housing unit under a month-to-month lease or
periodic tenancy at the time the property is sold in foreclosure
shall be given 90 days' written notice to quit pursuant to Section
1162 before the tenant or subtenant may be removed from the property
as prescribed in this chapter.
   (b) In addition to the rights set forth in subdivision (a),
tenants or subtenants holding possession of a rental housing unit
under a fixed-term residential lease entered into before transfer of
title at the foreclosure sale shall have the right to possession
until the end of the lease term, and all rights and obligations under
the lease shall survive foreclosure, except that the tenancy may be
terminated upon 90 days' written notice to quit pursuant to
subdivision (a) if any of the following conditions apply:
   (1) The purchaser or successor in interest will occupy the housing
unit as a primary residence.
   (2) The lessee is the mortgagor or the child, spouse, or parent of
the mortgagor.
   (3) The lease was not the result of an arms' length transaction.
   (4) The lease requires the receipt of rent that is substantially
less than fair market rent for the property, except when rent is
reduced or subsidized due to a federal, state, or local subsidy or
law.
   (c) The purchaser or successor in interest shall bear the burden
of proof in establishing that a fixed-term residential lease is not
entitled to protection under subdivision (b).
   (d) This section shall not apply if any party to the note remains
in the property as a tenant, subtenant, or occupant.
   (e) Nothing in this section is intended to affect any local just
cause eviction ordinance. This section does not, and shall not be
construed to, affect the authority of a public entity that otherwise
exists to regulate or monitor the basis for eviction.
   (f) This section shall remain in effect only until December 31,
2019, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that is enacted before December 31, 2019, deletes or extends
that date.

1161c.  (a) In the case of any foreclosure on a residential
property, the immediate successor in interest in the property
pursuant to the foreclosure shall attach a cover sheet, in the form
as set forth in subdivision (b), to any notice of termination of
tenancy served on a tenant of that property within the first year
after the foreclosure sale. This notice shall not be required if any
of the following apply:
   (1) The tenancy is terminated pursuant to Section 1161.
   (2) The successor in interest and the tenant have executed a
written rental agreement or lease or a written acknowledgment of a
preexisting rental agreement or lease.
   (3) The tenant receiving the notice was not a tenant at the time
of the foreclosure.
   (b) The cover sheet shall consist of the following notice, in at
least 12-point type:

   Notice to Any Renters Living At
   [street address of the unit]
   The attached notice means that your home was recently sold in
foreclosure and the new owner plans to evict you.
   You should talk to a lawyer NOW to see what your rights are. You
may receive court papers in a few days. If your name is on the papers
it may hurt your credit if you do not respond and simply move out.
   Also, if you do not respond within five days of receiving the
papers, even if you are not named in the papers, you will likely lose
any rights you may have. In some cases, you can respond without
hurting your credit. You should ask a lawyer about it.
   You may have the right to stay in your home for 90 days or longer,
regardless of any deadlines stated on any attached papers. In some
cases and in some cities with a "just cause for eviction law," you
may not have to move at all. But you must take the proper legal steps
in order to protect your rights.
   How to Get Legal Help
   If you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free
legal services from a nonprofit legal services program. You can
locate these nonprofit groups at the California Legal Services
Internet Web site (www.lawhelpca.org), the California Courts Online
Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), or by contacting
your local court or county bar association.

   (c) If the notice to quit specifies an effective date of at least
90 days after the notice is served, without qualification, no cover
sheet shall be required, provided that the notice incorporates the
text of the cover sheet, as set forth in subdivision (b) in at least
10-point type. The incorporated text shall omit the caption and the
first paragraph of the cover sheet and the fourth paragraph of the
cover sheet shall be replaced by the following language:

   You may have the right to stay in your home for longer than 90
days. If you have a lease that ends more than 90 days from now, the
new owner must honor the lease under many circumstances. Also, in
some cases and in some cities with a "just cause for eviction law,"
you may not have to move at all. But you must take the proper legal
steps in order to protect your rights.

   (d) This section shall remain in effect only until December 31,
2019, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that is enacted before December 31, 2019, deletes or extends
that date.

1162.  (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), the notices
required by Sections 1161 and 1161a may be served by any of the
following methods:
   (1) By delivering a copy to the tenant personally.
   (2) If he or she is absent from his or her place of residence, and
from his or her usual place of business, by leaving a copy with some
person of suitable age and discretion at either place, and sending a
copy through the mail addressed to the tenant at his or her place of
residence.
   (3) If such place of residence and business cannot be ascertained,
or a person of suitable age or discretion there can not be found,
then by affixing a copy in a conspicuous place on the property, and
also delivering a copy to a person there residing, if such person can
be found; and also sending a copy through the mail addressed to the
tenant at the place where the property is situated. Service upon a
subtenant may be made in the same manner.
   (b) The notices required by Section 1161 may be served upon a
commercial tenant by any of the following methods:
   (1) By delivering a copy to the tenant personally.
   (2) If he or she is absent from the commercial rental property, by
leaving a copy with some person of suitable age and discretion at
the property, and sending a copy through the mail addressed to the
tenant at the address where the property is situated.
   (3) If, at the time of attempted service, a person of suitable age
or discretion is not found at the rental property through the
exercise of reasonable diligence, then by affixing a copy in a
conspicuous place on the property, and also sending a copy through
the mail addressed to the tenant at the address where the property is
situated. Service upon a subtenant may be made in the same manner.
   (c) For purposes of subdivision (b), "commercial tenant" means a
person or entity that hires any real property in this state that is
not a dwelling unit, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 1940 of
the Civil Code, or a mobilehome, as defined in Section 798.3 of the
Civil Code.

1162a.  In any case in which service or exhibition of a receiver's
or levying officer's deed is required, in lieu thereof service of a
copy or copies of the deed may be made as provided in Section 1162.

1164.  No person other than the tenant of the premises and
subtenant, if there be one, in the actual occupation of the premises
when the complaint is filed, need be made parties defendant in the
proceeding, nor shall any proceeding abate, nor the plaintiff be
nonsuited for the nonjoinder of any person who might have been made
party defendant, but when it appears that any of the parties served
with process, or appearing in the proceeding, are guilty of the
offense charged, judgment must be rendered against him or her. In
case a defendant has become a subtenant of the premises in
controversy, after the service of the notice provided for by
subdivision 2 of Section 1161 of this code, upon the tenant of the
premises, the fact that such notice was not served on each subtenant
shall constitute no defense to the action. All persons who enter the
premises under the tenant, after the commencement of the suit, shall
be bound by the judgment, the same as if he or they had been made
party to the action.

1165.  Except as provided in the preceding section, the provisions
of Part II of this Code, relating to parties to civil actions, are
applicable to this proceeding.

1166.  (a) The complaint shall:
   (1) Be verified and include the typed or printed name of the
person verifying the complaint.
   (2) Set forth the facts on which the plaintiff seeks to recover.
   (3) Describe the premises with reasonable certainty.
   (4) If the action is based on paragraph (2) of Section 1161, state
the amount of rent in default.
   (5) State specifically the method used to serve the defendant with
the notice or notices of termination upon which the complaint is
based. This requirement may be satisfied by using and completing all
items relating to service of the notice or notices in an appropriate
Judicial Council form complaint, or by attaching a proof of service
of the notice or notices of termination served on the defendant.
   (b) The complaint may set forth any circumstances of fraud, force,
or violence that may have accompanied the alleged forcible entry or
forcible or unlawful detainer, and claim damages therefor.
   (c) In an action regarding residential real property based on
Section 1161a, the plaintiff shall state in the caption of the
complaint "Action based on Code of Civil Procedure Section 1161a."
   (d) (1) In an action regarding residential property, the plaintiff
shall attach to the complaint the following:
   (A) A copy of the notice or notices of termination served on the
defendant upon which the complaint is based.
   (B) A copy of any written lease or rental agreement regarding the
premises. Any addenda or attachments to the lease or written
agreement that form the basis of the complaint shall also be
attached. The documents required by this subparagraph are not
required to be attached if the complaint alleges any of the
following:
   (i) The lease or rental agreement is oral.
   (ii) A written lease or rental agreement regarding the premises is
not in the possession of the landlord or any agent or employee of
the landlord.
   (iii) An action based solely on subdivision (2) of Section 1161.
   (2) If the plaintiff fails to attach the documents required by
this subdivision, the court shall grant leave to amend the complaint
for a five-day period in order to include the required attachments.
   (e) Upon filing the complaint, a summons shall be issued thereon.

1166a.  (a) Upon filing the complaint, the plaintiff may, upon
motion, have immediate possession of the premises by a writ of
possession of a manufactured home, mobilehome, or real property
issued by the court and directed to the sheriff of the county or
marshal, for execution, where it appears to the satisfaction of the
court, after a hearing on the motion, from the verified complaint and
from any affidavits filed or oral testimony given by or on behalf of
the parties, that the defendant resides out of state, has departed
from the state, cannot, after due diligence, be found within the
state, or has concealed himself or herself to avoid the service of
summons. The motion shall indicate that the writ applies to all
tenants, subtenants, if any, named claimants, if any, and any other
occupants of the premises.
   (b) Written notice of the hearing on the motion shall be served on
the defendant by the plaintiff in accordance with the provisions of
Section 1011, and shall inform the defendant as follows: "You may
file affidavits on your own behalf with the court and may appear and
present testimony on your own behalf. However, if you fail to appear,
the plaintiff will apply to the court for a writ of possession of a
manufactured home, mobilehome, or real property."
   (c) The plaintiff shall file an undertaking in a sum that shall be
fixed and determined by the judge, to the effect that, if the
plaintiff fails to recover judgment against the defendant for the
possession of the premises or if the suit is dismissed, the plaintiff
will pay to the defendant those damages, not to exceed the amount
fixed in the undertaking, as may be sustained by the defendant by
reason of that dispossession under the writ of possession of a
manufactured home, mobilehome, or real property.
   (d) If, at the hearing on the motion, the findings of the court
are in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant, an order
shall be entered for the immediate possession of the premises.
   (e) The order for the immediate possession of the premises may be
enforced as provided in Division 3 (commencing with Section 712.010)
of Title 9 of Part 2.
   (f) For the purposes of this section, references in Division 3
(commencing with Section 712.010) of Title 9 of Part 2 and in
subdivisions (e) to (m), inclusive, of Section 1174, to the "judgment
debtor" shall be deemed references to the defendant, to the
"judgment creditor" shall be deemed references to the plaintiff, and
to the "judgment of possession or sale of property" shall be deemed
references to an order for the immediate possession of the premises.

1167.  The summons shall be in the form specified in Section 412.20
except that when the defendant is served, the defendant's response
shall be filed within five days, including Saturdays and Sundays but
excluding all other judicial holidays, after the complaint is served
upon him or her. If the last day for filing the response falls on a
Saturday or Sunday, the response period shall be extended to and
including the next court day.
   In all other respects the summons shall be issued and served and
returned in the same manner as a summons in a civil action.

1167.3.  In any action under this chapter, unless otherwise ordered
by the court for good cause shown, the time allowed the defendant to
answer the complaint, answer the complaint, if amended, or amend the
answer under paragraph (2), (3), (5), (6), or (7) of subdivision (a)
of Section 586 shall not exceed five days.

1167.4.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in any action
under this chapter:
   (a) Where the defendant files a notice of motion as provided for
in subdivision (a) of Section 418.10, the time for making the motion
shall be not less than three days nor more than seven days after the
filing of the notice.
   (b) The service and filing of a notice of motion under subdivision
(a) shall extend the defendant's time to plead until five days after
service upon him of the written notice of entry of an order denying
his motion, except that for good cause shown the court may extend the
defendant's time to plead for an additional period not exceeding 15
days.

1167.5.  Unless otherwise ordered by the court for good cause shown,
no extension of time allowed in any action under this chapter for
the causes specified in Section 1054 shall exceed 10 days without the
consent of the adverse party.

1169.  If, at the time appointed, any defendant served with a
summons does not appear and defend, the clerk, upon written
application of the plaintiff and proof of the service of summons and
complaint, shall enter the default of any defendant so served, and,
if requested by the plaintiff, immediately shall enter judgment for
restitution of the premises and shall issue a writ of execution
thereon. The application for default judgment and the default
judgment shall include a place to indicate that the judgment includes
tenants, subtenants, if any, named claimants, if any, and any other
occupants of the premises. Thereafter, the plaintiff may apply to the
court for any other relief demanded in the complaint, including the
costs, against the defendant, or defendants, or against one or more
of the defendants.

1170.  On or before the day fixed for his appearance, the defendant
may appear and answer or demur.

1170.5.  (a) If the defendant appears pursuant to Section 1170,
trial of the proceeding shall be held not later than the 20th day
following the date that the request to set the time of the trial is
made. Judgment shall be entered thereon and, if the plaintiff
prevails, a writ of execution shall be issued immediately by the
court upon the request of the plaintiff.
   (b) The court may extend the period for trial upon the agreement
of all of the parties. No other extension of the time for trial of an
action under this chapter may be granted unless the court, upon its
own motion or on motion of any party, holds a hearing and renders a
decision thereon as specified in subdivision (c).
   (c) If trial is not held within the time specified in this
section, the court, upon finding that there is a reasonable
probability that the plaintiff will prevail in the action, shall
determine the amount of damages, if any, to be suffered by the
plaintiff by reason of the extension, and shall issue an order
requiring the defendant to pay that amount into court as the rent
would have otherwise become due and payable or into an escrow
designated by the court for so long as the defendant remains in
possession pending the termination of the action.
   The determination of the amount of the payment shall be based on
the plaintiff's verified statement of the contract rent for rental
payment, any verified objection thereto filed by the defendant, and
the oral or demonstrative evidence presented at the hearing. The
court's determination of the amount of damages shall include
consideration of any evidence, presented by the parties, embracing
the issue of diminution of value or any set off permitted by law.
   (d) If the defendant fails to make a payment ordered by the court,
trial of the action shall be held within 15 days of the date payment
was due.
   (e) Any cost for administration of an escrow account pursuant to
this section shall be recoverable by the prevailing party as part of
any recoverable cost in the action.
   (f) After trial of the action, the court shall determine the
distribution of the payment made into court or the escrow designated
by the court.
   (g) Where payments into court or the escrow designated by the
court are made pursuant to this section, the court may order that the
payments be invested in an insured interest-bearing account.
Interest on the account shall be allocated to the parties in the same
proportions as the original funds are allocated.
   (h) If any provision of this section or the application thereof to
any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall
not affect other provisions or applications of the section which can
be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to
this end the provisions of this section are severable.
   (i) Nothing in this section shall be construed to abrogate or
interfere with the precedence given to the trial of criminal cases
over the trial of civil matters by Section 1050 of the Penal Code.

1170.7.  A motion for summary judgment may be made at any time after
the answer is filed upon giving five days notice. Summary judgment
shall be granted or denied on the same basis as a motion under
Section 437c.

1170.8.  In any action under this chapter, a discovery motion may be
made at any time upon giving five days' notice.

1170.9.  The Judicial Council shall adopt rules, not inconsistent
with statute, prescribing the time for filing and serving opposition
and reply papers, if any, relating to a motion under Section 1167.4,
1170.7, or 1170.8.

1171.  Whenever an issue of fact is presented by the pleadings, it
must be tried by a jury, unless such jury be waived as in other
cases. The jury shall be formed in the same manner as other trial
juries in an action of the same jurisdictional classification in the
Court in which the action is pending.

1172.  On the trial of any proceeding for any forcible entry or
forcible detainer, the plaintiff shall only be required to show, in
addition to the forcible entry or forcible detainer complained of,
that he was peaceably in the actual possession at the time of the
forcible entry, or was entitled to the possession at the time of the
forcible detainer. The defendant may show in his defense that he or
his ancestors, or those whose interest in such premises he claims,
have been in the quiet possession thereof for the space of one whole
year together next before the commencement of the proceedings, and
that his interest therein is not then ended or determined; and such
showing is a bar to the proceedings.

1173.  When, upon the trial of any proceeding under this chapter, it
appears from the evidence that the defendant has been guilty of
either a forcible entry or a forcible or unlawful detainer, and other
than the offense charged in the complaint, the Judge must order that
such complaint be forthwith amended to conform to such proofs; such
amendment must be made without any imposition of terms. No
continuance shall be permitted upon account of such amendment unless
the defendant, by affidavit filed, shows to the satisfaction of the
Court good cause therefor.

1174.  (a) If upon the trial, the verdict of the jury, or, if the
case be tried without a jury, the findings of the court be in favor
of the plaintiff and against the defendant, judgment shall be entered
for the possession of the premises; and if the proceedings be for an
unlawful detainer after neglect, or failure to perform the
conditions or covenants of the lease or agreement under which the
property is held, or after default in the payment of rent, the
judgment shall also declare the forfeiture of that lease or agreement
if the notice required by Section 1161 states the election of the
landlord to declare the forfeiture thereof, but if that notice does
not so state that election, the lease or agreement shall not be
forfeited.
   Except as provided in Section 1166a, in any action for unlawful
detainer brought by a petroleum distributor against a gasoline
dealer, possession shall not be restored to the petroleum distributor
unless the court in the unlawful detainer action determines that the
petroleum distributor had good cause under Section 20999.1 of the
Business and Professions Code to terminate, cancel, or refuse to
renew the franchise of the gasoline dealer.
   In any action for unlawful detainer brought by a petroleum
distributor against the gasoline dealer, the court may, at the time
of request of either party, require the tenant to make rental
payments into the court, for the lessor, at the contract rate,
pending the resolution of the action.
   (b) The jury or the court, if the proceedings be tried without a
jury, shall also assess the damages occasioned to the plaintiff by
any forcible entry, or by any forcible or unlawful detainer, alleged
in the complaint and proved on the trial, and find the amount of any
rent due, if the alleged unlawful detainer be after default in the
payment of rent. If the defendant is found guilty of forcible entry,
or forcible or unlawful detainer, and malice is shown, the plaintiff
may be awarded statutory damages of up to six hundred dollars ($600),
in addition to actual damages, including rent found due. The trier
of fact shall determine whether actual damages, statutory damages, or
both, shall be awarded, and judgment shall be entered accordingly.
   (c) When the proceeding is for an unlawful detainer after default
in the payment of rent, and the lease or agreement under which the
rent is payable has not by its terms expired, and the notice required
by Section 1161 has not stated the election of the landlord to
declare the forfeiture thereof, the court may, and, if the lease or
agreement is in writing, is for a term of more than one year, and
does not contain a forfeiture clause, shall order that a writ shall
not be issued to enforce the judgment until the expiration of five
days after the entry of the judgment, within which time the tenant,
or any subtenant, or any mortgagee of the term, or any other party
interested in its continuance, may pay into the court, for the
landlord, the amount found due as rent, with interest thereon, and
the amount of the damages found by the jury or the court for the
unlawful detainer, and the costs of the proceedings, and thereupon
the judgment shall be satisfied and the tenant be restored to the
tenant's estate. If payment as provided in this subdivision is not
made within five days, the judgment may be enforced for its full
amount and for the possession of the premises. In all other cases the
judgment may be enforced immediately.
   (d) Subject to subdivision (c), the judgment for possession of the
premises may be enforced as provided in Division 3 (commencing with
Section 712.010) of Title 9 of Part 2.
   (e) Personal property remaining on the premises which the landlord
reasonably believes to have been lost shall be disposed of pursuant
to Article 1 (commencing with Section 2080) of Chapter 4 of Title 6
of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code. The landlord is not liable
to the owner of any property which is disposed of in this manner. If
the appropriate police or sheriff's department refuses to accept
that property, it shall be deemed not to have been lost for the
purposes of this subdivision.
   (f) The landlord shall give notice pursuant to Section 1983 of the
Civil Code to any person (other than the tenant) reasonably believed
by the landlord to be the owner of personal property remaining on
the premises unless the procedure for surrender of property under
Section 1965 of the Civil Code has been initiated or completed.
   (g) The landlord shall store the personal property in a place of
safekeeping until it is either released pursuant to subdivision (h)
or disposed of pursuant to subdivision (i).
   (h) The landlord shall release the personal property pursuant to
Section 1965 of the Civil Code or shall release it to the tenant or,
at the landlord's option, to a person reasonably believed by the
landlord to be its owner if the tenant or other person pays the costs
of storage as provided in Section 1990 of the Civil Code and claims
the property not later than the date specified in the writ of
possession before which the tenant must make his or her claim or the
date specified in the notice before which a person other than the
tenant must make his or her claim.
   (i) Personal property not released pursuant to subdivision (h)
shall be disposed of pursuant to Section 1988 of the Civil Code.
   (j) Where the landlord releases personal property to the tenant
pursuant to subdivision (h), the landlord is not liable with respect
to that property to any person.
   (k) Where the landlord releases personal property pursuant to
subdivision (h) to a person (other than the tenant) reasonably
believed by the landlord to be its owner, the landlord is not liable
with respect to that property to:
   (1) The tenant or to any person to whom notice was given pursuant
to subdivision (f); or
   (2) Any other person, unless that person proves that, prior to
releasing the property, the landlord believed or reasonably should
have believed that the person had an interest in the property and
also that the landlord knew or should have known upon reasonable
investigation the address of that person.
   (l) Where personal property is disposed of pursuant to Section
1988 of the Civil Code, the landlord is not liable with respect to
that property to:
   (1) The tenant or to any person to whom notice was given pursuant
to subdivision (f); or
   (2) Any other person, unless that person proves that, prior to
disposing of the property pursuant to Section 1988 of the Civil Code,
the landlord believed or reasonably should have believed that the
person had an interest in the property and also that the landlord
knew or should have known upon reasonable investigation the address
of that person.
   (m) For the purposes of subdivisions (e), (f), (h), (k), and (l),
the terms "owner," "premises," and "reasonable belief" have the same
meaning as provided in Section 1980 of the Civil Code.

1174.2.  (a) In an unlawful detainer proceeding involving
residential premises after default in payment of rent and in which
the tenant has raised as an affirmative defense a breach of the
landlord's obligations under Section 1941 of the Civil Code or of any
warranty of habitability, the court shall determine whether a
substantial breach of these obligations has occurred. If the court
finds that a substantial breach has occurred, the court (1) shall
determine the reasonable rental value of the premises in its
untenantable state to the date of trial, (2) shall deny possession to
the landlord and adjudge the tenant to be the prevailing party,
conditioned upon the payment by the tenant of the rent that has
accrued to the date of the trial as adjusted pursuant to this
subdivision within a reasonable period of time not exceeding five
days, from the date of the court's judgment or, if service of the
court's judgment is made by mail, the payment shall be made within
the time set forth in Section 1013, (3) may order the landlord to
make repairs and correct the conditions which constitute a breach of
the landlord's obligations, (4) shall order that the monthly rent be
limited to the reasonable rental value of the premises as determined
pursuant to this subdivision until repairs are completed, and (5)
except as otherwise provided in subdivision (b), shall award the
tenant costs and attorneys' fees if provided by, and pursuant to, any
statute or the contract of the parties. If the court orders repairs
or corrections, or both, pursuant to paragraph (3), the court's
jurisdiction continues over the matter for the purpose of ensuring
compliance. The court shall, however, award possession of the
premises to the landlord if the tenant fails to pay all rent accrued
to the date of trial, as determined due in the judgment, within the
period prescribed by the court pursuant to this subdivision. The
tenant shall, however, retain any rights conferred by Section 1174.
   (b) If the court determines that there has been no substantial
breach of Section 1941 of the Civil Code or of any warranty of
habitability by the landlord or if the tenant fails to pay all rent
accrued to the date of trial, as required by the court pursuant to
subdivision (a), then judgment shall be entered in favor of the
landlord, and the landlord shall be the prevailing party for the
purposes of awarding costs or attorneys' fees pursuant to any statute
or the contract of the parties.
   (c) As used in this section, "substantial breach" means the
failure of the landlord to comply with applicable building and
housing code standards which materially affect health and safety.
   (d) Nothing in this section is intended to deny the tenant the
right to a trial by jury. Nothing in this section shall limit or
supersede any provision of Chapter 12.75 (commencing with Section
7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code.

1174.21.  A landlord who institutes an unlawful detainer proceeding
based upon a tenant's nonpayment of rent, and who is liable for a
violation of Section 1942.4 of the Civil Code, shall be liable to the
tenant or lessee for reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of the
suit, in an amount to be fixed by the court.

1174.25.  (a) Any occupant who is served with a prejudgment claim of
right to possession in accordance with Section 415.46 may file a
claim as prescribed in Section 415.46, with the court within 10 days
of the date of service of the prejudgment claim to right of
possession as shown on the return of service, which period shall
include Saturday and Sunday but excluding all other judicial
holidays. If the last day for filing the claim falls on a Saturday or
Sunday, the filing period shall be extended to and including the
next court day. Filing the prejudgment claim of right to possession
shall constitute a general appearance for which a fee shall be
collected as provided in Section 70614 of the Government Code.
Section 68511.3 of the Government Code applies to the prejudgment
claim of right to possession.
   (b) At the time of filing, the claimant shall be added as a
defendant in the action for unlawful detainer and the clerk shall
notify the plaintiff that the claimant has been added as a defendant
in the action by mailing a copy of the claim filed with the court to
the plaintiff with a notation so indicating. The claimant shall
answer or otherwise respond to the summons and complaint within five
days, including Saturdays and Sundays but excluding all other
judicial holidays, after filing the prejudgment claim of possession.
Thereafter, the name of the claimant shall be added to any pleading,
filing or form filed in the action for unlawful detainer.

1174.3.  (a) Unless a prejudgment claim of right to possession has
been served upon occupants in accordance with Section 415.46, any
occupant not named in the judgment for possession who occupied the
premises on the date of the filing of the action may object to
enforcement of the judgment against that occupant by filing a claim
of right to possession as prescribed in this section. A claim of
right to possession may be filed at any time after service or posting
of the writ of possession pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b) of
Section 715.020, up to and including the time at which the levying
officer returns to effect the eviction of those named in the judgment
of possession. Filing the claim of right to possession shall
constitute a general appearance for which a fee shall be collected as
provided in Section 70614 of the Government Code. Section 68511.3 of
the Government Code applies to the claim of right to possession. An
occupant or tenant who is named in the action shall not be required
to file a claim of right to possession to protect that occupant's
right to possession of the premises.
   (b) The court issuing the writ of possession of real property
shall set a date or dates when the court will hold a hearing to
determine the validity of objections to enforcement of the judgment
specified in subdivision (a). An occupant of the real property for
which the writ is issued may make an objection to eviction to the
levying officer at the office of the levying officer or at the
premises at the time of the eviction.
   If a claim of right to possession is completed and presented to
the sheriff, marshal, or other levying officer, the officer shall
forthwith (1) stop the eviction of occupants at the premises, and (2)
provide a receipt or copy of the completed claim of right of
possession to the claimant indicating the date and time the completed
form was received, and (3) deliver the original completed claim of
right to possession to the court issuing the writ of possession of
real property.
   (c) A claim of right to possession is effected by any of the
following:
   (1) Presenting a completed claim form in person with
identification to the sheriff, marshal, or other levying officer as
prescribed in this section, and delivering to the court within two
court days after its presentation, an amount equal to 15 days' rent
together with the appropriate fee or form for proceeding in forma
pauperis. Upon receipt of a claim of right to possession, the
sheriff, marshal, or other levying officer shall indicate thereon the
date and time of its receipt and forthwith deliver the original to
the issuing court and a receipt or copy of the claim to the claimant
and notify the plaintiff of that fact. Immediately upon receipt of an
amount equal to 15 days' rent and the appropriate fee or form for
proceeding in forma pauperis, the court shall file the claim of right
to possession and serve an endorsed copy with the notice of the
hearing date on the plaintiff and the claimant by first-class mail.
The court issuing the writ of possession shall set and hold a hearing
on the claim not less than five nor more than 15 days after the
claim is filed with the court.
   (2) Presenting a completed claim form in person with
identification to the sheriff, marshal, or other levying officer as
prescribed in this section, and delivering to the court within two
court days after its presentation, the appropriate fee or form for
proceeding in forma pauperis without delivering the amount equivalent
to 15 days' rent. In this case, the court shall immediately set a
hearing on the claim to be held on the fifth day after the filing is
completed. The court shall notify the claimant of the hearing date at
the time the claimant completes the filing by delivering to the
court the appropriate fee or form for proceeding in forma pauperis,
and shall notify the plaintiff of the hearing date by first-class
mail. Upon receipt of a claim of right to possession, the sheriff,
marshal, or other levying officer shall indicate thereon the date and
time of its receipt and forthwith deliver the original to the
issuing court and a receipt or copy of the claim to the claimant and
notify the plaintiff of that fact.
   (d) At the hearing, the court shall determine whether there is a
valid claim of possession by the claimant who filed the claim, and
the court shall consider all evidence produced at the hearing,
including, but not limited to, the information set forth in the
claim. The court may determine the claim to be valid or invalid based
upon the evidence presented at the hearing. The court shall
determine the claim to be invalid if the court determines that the
claimant is an invitee, licensee, guest, or trespasser. If the court
determines the claim is invalid, the court shall order the return to
the claimant of the amount of the 15 days' rent paid by the claimant,
if that amount was paid pursuant to paragraph (1) or (3) of
subdivision (c), less a pro rata amount for each day that enforcement
of the judgment was delayed by reason of making the claim of right
to possession, which pro rata amount shall be paid to the landlord.
If the court determines the claim is valid, the amount equal to 15
days' rent paid by the claimant shall be returned immediately to the
claimant.
   (e) If, upon hearing, the court determines that the claim is
valid, then the court shall order further proceedings as follows:
   (1) If the unlawful detainer is based upon a curable breach, and
the claimant was not previously served with a proper notice, if any
notice is required, then the required notice may at the plaintiff's
discretion be served on the claimant at the hearing or thereafter. If
the claimant does not cure the breach within the required time, then
a supplemental complaint may be filed and served on the claimant as
defendant if the plaintiff proceeds against the claimant in the same
action. For the purposes of this section only, service of the
required notice, if any notice is required, and of the supplemental
complaint may be made by first-class mail addressed to the claimant
at the subject premises or upon his or her attorney of record and, in
either case, Section 1013 shall otherwise apply. Further proceedings
on the merits of the claimant's continued right to possession after
service of the Summons and Supplemental Complaint as prescribed by
this subdivision shall be conducted pursuant to this chapter.
   (2) In all other cases, the court shall deem the unlawful detainer
Summons and Complaint to be amended on their faces to include the
claimant as defendant, service of the Summons and Complaint, as thus
amended, may at the plaintiff's discretion be made at the hearing or
thereafter, and the claimant thus named and served as a defendant in
the action shall answer or otherwise respond within five days
thereafter.
   (f) If a claim is made without delivery to the court of the
appropriate filing fee or a form for proceeding in forma pauperis, as
prescribed in this section, the claim shall be immediately deemed
denied and the court shall so order. Upon the denial of the claim,
the court shall immediately deliver an endorsed copy of the order to
the levying officer and shall serve an endorsed copy of the order on
the plaintiff and claimant by first-class mail.
   (g) If the claim of right to possession is denied pursuant to
subdivision (f), or if the claimant fails to appear at the hearing
or, upon hearing, if the court determines that there are no valid
claims, or if the claimant does not prevail at a trial on the merits
of the unlawful detainer action, the court shall order the levying
officer to proceed with enforcement of the original writ of
possession of real property as deemed amended to include the
claimant, which shall be effected within a reasonable time not to
exceed five days. Upon receipt of the court's order, the levying
officer shall enforce the writ of possession of real property against
any occupant or occupants.
   (h) The claim of right to possession shall be made on the
following form:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE TEXT: The Claim of Right to Possession form
appears in the hard-copy publication of the chaptered bill.
See Sec. 43 of Chapter 75, Statutes of 2005.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

1174.5.  A judgment in unlawful detainer declaring the forfeiture of
the lease or agreement under which real property is held shall not
relieve the lessee from liability pursuant to Section 1951.2 of the
Civil Code.

1176.  (a) An appeal taken by the defendant shall not automatically
stay proceedings upon the judgment. Petition for stay of the judgment
pending appeal shall first be directed to the judge before whom it
was rendered. Stay of judgment shall be granted when the court finds
that the moving party will suffer extreme hardship in the absence of
a stay and that the nonmoving party will not be irreparably injured
by its issuance. If the stay is denied by the trial court, the
defendant may forthwith file a petition for an extraordinary writ
with the appropriate appeals court. If the trial or appellate court
stays enforcement of the judgment, the court may condition the stay
on whatever conditions the court deems just, but in any case it shall
order the payment of the reasonable monthly rental value to the
court monthly in advance as rent would otherwise become due as a
condition of issuing the stay of enforcement. As used in this
subdivision, "reasonable rental value" means the contract rent unless
the rental value has been modified by the trial court in which case
that modified rental value shall be used.
   (b) A new cause of action on the same agreement for the rental of
real property shall not be barred because of an appeal by any party.

1177.  Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter the provisions
of Part II of this Code are applicable to, and constitute the rules
of practice in the proceedings mentioned in this Chapter.

1178.  The provisions of Part 2 of this code, relative to new trials
and appeals, except insofar as they are inconsistent with the
provisions of this chapter or with rules adopted by the Judicial
Council, apply to the proceedings mentioned in this chapter.

1179.  The court may relieve a tenant against a forfeiture of a
lease or rental agreement, whether written or oral, and whether or
not the tenancy has terminated, and restore him or her to his or her
former estate or tenancy, in case of hardship, as provided in Section
1174. The court has the discretion to relieve any person against
forfeiture on its own motion.
   An application for relief against forfeiture may be made at any
time prior to restoration of the premises to the landlord. The
application may be made by a tenant or subtenant, or a mortgagee of
the term, or any person interested in the continuance of the term. It
must be made upon petition, setting forth the facts upon which the
relief is sought, and be verified by the applicant. Notice of the
application, with a copy of the petition, must be served at least
five days prior to the hearing on the plaintiff in the judgment, who
may appear and contest the application. Alternatively, a person
appearing without an attorney may make the application orally, if the
plaintiff either is present and has an opportunity to contest the
application, or has been given ex parte notice of the hearing and the
purpose of the oral application. In no case shall the application or
motion be granted except on condition that full payment of rent due,
or full performance of conditions or covenants stipulated, so far as
the same is practicable, be made.

1179a.  In all proceedings brought to recover the possession of real
property pursuant to the provisions of this chapter all courts,
wherein such actions are or may hereafter be pending, shall give such
actions precedence over all other civil actions therein, except
actions to which special precedence is given by law, in the matter of
the setting the same for hearing or trial, and in hearing the same,
to the end that all such actions shall be quickly heard and
determined.


	mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
	mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
	mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Plaintiff alleges:

1.
[Capacity
and residence. See § 334.58(1}, 9 1.]

2.   [Plaintiff s former residence. See §
334.58[1], 9 2. ]

3.   [Fictitious name allegation, if
appropriate. See § 334.50(1}, 9 2. \

4.   On or about_______ [date], defendant landlord,___________ [name],

with the intent to terminate plaintiffs occupancy of the premises, did

willfully and maliciously, directly and indirectly,__________ [specify
action

proscribed by Civ. Code § 789.3(b), e.g., prevent plaintiff from gaining reasonable
access to the premises by changing the locks on all the doors without giving
plaintiff keys for the new locks].

5.
[Specify
length of time during which interference with occupancy of premises continued,
e.g.,
Plaintiff was prevented reasonable access to the premises for a period of seven days.]

6.  As a direct and proximate result of defendant’s actions, plaintiff has suffered and
is suffering general damages in the amount of $_____________________________________________

7.Plaintiff is entitled to statutory punitive damages under Civil Code Section 789.3(c) in
the amount of $100 for each day or part of a day that defendant remains in
violation of Civil Code Section 789.3(b) and in no event is plaintiff entitled
to less than $250 for each cause of action.

8.  Plaintiff is entitled to receive from defendant______________
[name]

punitive damages.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION Plaintiff alleges:

9.Plaintiff hereby incorporates Paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of his/her First
Cause of Action.

10.The written tenancy agreement mentioned above created a periodic estate in
plaintiffs favor in           [street address and city ], California.

11.  On or about_______ [date], defendant landlord,__________ [name],

willfully and maliciously trespassed on plaintiffs estate for the purpose of

________ [specify,
e.g.,
changing the locks on all the doors and windows


12.                                                   As
a direct and proximate result thereof, plaintiff has suffered general
damages in the amount of $———–

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Plaintiff alleges:

13.Plaintiff
hereby incorporates Paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of his/her First Cause of Action.

14.On or about______ [date ], defendant landlord,__________ [name ],

with
the intent to terminate plaintiffs occupancy of the premises, did

willfully and maliciously, directly and indirectly,_________ [specify action

proscribed by Civ. Code § 789.3(b), e.g., prevent plaintiff from gaining reasonable
access to the premises by changing the locks on all the doors and windows
without giving plaintiff keys for the new locks].

[15. If
the landlord ceased interfering with plaintiffs use and occupancy of the
premises, specify when this occurred, e.g.,
Plaintiff received keys for

the new locks
from defendant landlord,__________ {name),
on or about

______ [date),
following a demand letter from plaintiffs attorney.]

[16. Specify
length of time during which interference with occupancy continued, e.g.,
Plaintiff
was prevented reasonable access to the premises

from_______
[date), to and including__________
[date), or a total of

________ [e.g.,
seven) days or fraction thereof.]

17.As a further direct and
proximate result of defendant’s actions,

plaintiff_________ [specify
loss or damages, e.g„
was forced to pay fines

for_________ [e.g.,
20)
library books which were overdue since he/she

could not gain
access to them to return them on the due date, all to his/her
special damage in the amount of $_______ 1.

18.  As a direct and proximate result of
defendant’s actions, plaintiff has suffered and is suffering damages in the
amount of $_________________________________________

19.  Plaintiff is entitled to statutory
punitive damages under Civil Code Section 789.3(c) in the amount of $100 for
each day or part of a day that defendant remains in violation of Civil Code
Section 789.3(b) and in no event is plaintiff entitled to less than $250 for
each cause of action.

20.  Plaintiff is entitled to receive from
defendant landlord,___________

[name ], punitive damages.

FOURTH CAUSE OF
ACTION
Plaintiff
alleges:

21.  Plaintiff hereby incorporates Paragraphs
1, 2, and 3 of his/her First Cause of Action; and Paragraphs 14,15,16, and 17
of his/her Third Cause of Action.

22.  Plaintiff is entitled to appropriate
injunctive relief during the pen­dency of this action under Civil Code Section
789.3(c) and without this injunctive relief will suffer irreparable injury in
that     [specify

facts that wUl constitute great and irreparable injury, e.g., plaintiff will continue to be without a home and
without access to his/her, personal possessions and will be forced to stay in a
motel and buy new personal possessions such as clothes and cooking utensils).
Plaintiff has no plain,

speedy, and adequate remedy at law because__________ [specify facts in

addition to those
previously alleged that tend to show the inadequacy of any legal remedy that plaintiff might pursue, e.g.,
it will be
impossible for
plaintiff
to determine the precise amount of damage that he/she will suffer if
defendant’s conduct is not restrained].

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as
follows:

1.
For
an order requiring defendant to show cause, if any he/she has, why he/she
should not be enjoined as hereinafter set forth, during the pendency of this
action;

2.
For a
temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction enjoin­ing defendant and
his/her agents, servants, and employees, and all per­sons acting under, in
concert with, or for defendant from         

[specify, e.g., interfering with plaintiffs reasonable
access to the premises by changing the locks].

3.
For
general damages on the First Cause of Action in the amount of

4.
For
punitive damages on the First Cause of Action.

5.
For
general damages on the Second Cause of Action in the amount of$         

6.
For
punitive damages on the Second Cause of Action.

7.
For
general damages on the Third Cause of Action in the amount of
$

8.
For
punitive damages on the Third Cause of Action.

9.
For
reasonable attorney’s fees as provided in Civil Code Section 789.3(d).

 

10.
For
costs of suit.

11.
For
such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper and
according to equity.

___________________________ [firm
name, if any]

By:_______________________________ [signature]

________________________________ [typed
name]

Attorney
for Plaintiff





















Eviction could validate a void Foreclosure sooo……. Watch out !

2 Apr

Lorenzo VelezBecause an unlawful detainer action is a summary proceeding usually limited to the issue of immediate possession of real property, a judgment in such an action usually has  [21] limited res judicata effect “and will not prevent one who is dispossessed from bringing a subsequent action to resolve questions of title.” (Vella v. Hudgins (1977) 20 Cal.3d 251, 255 (Vella).) An exception to this rule is contained in Code of Civil Procedure section 1161a, which extends the summary eviction remedy beyond the conventional unlawful detainer suit brought by a landlord to include actions by certain purchasers of property. (Vella, at p. 255.) In these cases, title to the property may be an issue.

In Malkoskie, the court applied the exception to the rule that title cannot be tried in unlawful detainer in circumstances similar to the present case. There, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Wells Fargo), after purchasing real property at a nonjudicial foreclosure sale, brought an unlawful detainer action against the previous homeowners pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1161a, subdivision (b)(3). This subdivision permits an unlawful detainer action against a person who holds over and continues possession of real property after receiving a three-day written notice to quit the property, “[w]here the property has been sold in accordance with Section 2924 of the Civil Code, under  [22] a power of sale contained in a deed of trust executed by such person, or a person under whom such person claims, and the title under the sale has been duly perfected.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1161a, subd. (b)(3), italics added.) In a subsequent action by the previous homeowners seeking to set aside the nonjudicial foreclosure sale, the court held that the judgment in the unlawful detainer action “conclusively resolved” the validity of title to the property in Wells Fargo’s favor. (Malkoskie, supra, 188 Cal.App.4th at p. 974.)

Likewise, in the UD action, the complaint alleged that U.S. Bank purchased the property at a foreclosure sale in accordance with Civil Code section 2924, and that it was seeking possession of the property pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1161a, subdivision (b). Subdivision (b) sets forth five circumstances under which an unlawful detainer action may be commenced, all of which require the plaintiff to purchase the property and to duly perfect title. Subdivision (b)(3) appears to be the only circumstance which applies to the facts stated in the complaint. 10 The complaint in the UD action thus raised the issue of title to the property. (Malkoskie, supra, 188 Cal.App.4th at p. 974.)

Although the judgment in the UD action was obtained by default, the issue of title was necessarily and actually decided. By permitting their default in the UD action to be entered, the Sarkisians confessed the truth of all material allegations in the complaint, including U.S. Bank’s allegations that it purchased the property at a foreclosure sale and thereafter perfected its interest in the property. (Fitzgerald v. Herzer (1947) 78 Cal.App.2d 127, 131.) The Sarkisians therefore are collaterally estopped from denying that U.S. Bank holds title to the property. (Murray v. Alaska Airlines, Inc. (2010) 50 Cal.4th 860, 871 [“Even a judgment of default in a civil proceeding is ‘res judicata as to all issues aptly pleaded in the complaint and defendant  [24] is estopped from denying in a subsequent action any allegations contained in the former complaint’ “].)

Each of plaintiffs’ causes of action in this case rest on the premise that U.S. Bank did not acquire title to the property. Because U.S. Bank conclusively established in the UD action that it holds title to the property, the trial court correctly sustained the bank defendants’ demurrer to the FAC.

Watchdog Report: Foreclosure Review Scrapped On Eve Of Critical, Congressman Says

6 Jan

Image

Posted: 12/31/2012 3:53 pm EST  |  Updated: 12/31/2012 4:08 pm EST

Foreclosure Review
242
5
103
211
Get Business Alerts:

The surprising decision by regulators to scrap a massive and expensive foreclosure review program in favor of a $10 billion settlement with 14 banks — reported by The New York Times Sunday night — came after a year of mounting concerns about the independence and effectiveness of the controversial program.

The program, known as the Independent Foreclosure Review, was supposed to give homeowners who believe that their bank made a mistake in handling their foreclosure an opportunity for a neutral third party to review the claim. It’s not clear what factors led banking regulators to abandon the program in favor of a settlement, but the final straw may have been a pending report by the Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan investigative arm of Congress, which was investigating the review program.

Rep. Brad Miller, a North Carolina Democrat, told The Huffington Post that the report, which has not been released, was “critical” and that the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which administers the review, was aware of its findings. Miller said that that one problem the GAO was likely to highlight was an “unacceptably high” error rate of 11 percent in a sampling of bank loan files.

The sample files were chosen at random by the banks from their broader pool of foreclosed homeowners, who had not necessarily applied for relief. The data suggests that of the 4 million families who lost their homes to foreclosure since the housing crash, more than 400,000 had some bank-caused problem in their loan file. It also suggests that many thousands of those who could have applied for relief didn’t — because they weren’t aware of the review, or weren’t aware that their bank had made a mistake. Some of these mistakes pushed homeowners into foreclosure who otherwise could have afforded to keep their homes.

Miller said the news that a settlement to replace the review was in the works caught him by surprise, and stressed that he had no way of knowing whether the impending GAO report had triggered the decision.

It’s not clear what will happen to the 250,000 homeowners who have already applied to the Independent Foreclosure Review for relief. The Times, citing people familiar with the negotiations, said that a deal between the banks and banking regulators, led by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, could be reached by the end of the week. It wasn’t clear how that money would be distributed or how many current and former homeowners who lost their homes to foreclosure — or who were hit with an unnecessary fee — might qualify.

Bryan Hubbard, a spokesman for the OCC, which administers the program, declined to comment on the Times’ story. Hubbard told HuffPost, “The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is committed to ensuring the Independent Foreclosure Review proceeds efficiently and to ensuring harmed borrowers are compensated as quickly as possible.”

Since the housing market crashed in 2007, thousands of foreclosed homeowners have complained that their mortgage company made a mistake in the management of their home loan, such as foreclosing on someone making payments on a loan modification plan. The Independent Foreclosure Review emerged from a legal agreement in April 2011 between 14 mortgage companies and bank regulators over these abusive “servicing” practices. It was supposed to give homeowners an opportunity to have an unbiased third party review their foreclosure and determine whether they might qualify for a cash payout of up to $125,000.

The initial response was tepid, at best. Homeowners and advocates complained that the application forms were confusing and that information about what type of compensation they might get was missing. Some told HuffPost that they were so disillusioned by the federal government’s anemic response to widely reported bank errors that they weren’t going to bother to apply.

In one instance, Daniel Casper, an Illinois wedding videographer, applied to the program in January after years of combat with Bank of America over his home loan. As The Huffington Post reported in October, he was initially rejected, because, according to the bank, his mortgage was not in the foreclosure process during the eligible review period. Promontory Financial Group, which Bank of America hired to review his loan, apparently did not double check Bank of America’s analysis against the extensive documentation that Chase submitted. That documentation clearly showed that his loan was eligible for review.

In recent months ProPublica, an investigative nonprofit, has issued a series of damning articles about the Independent Foreclosure Review. The most recent found that supposedly independent third-party reviewers looking over Bank of America loan files were given the “correct” answers in advance by the bank. These reviewers could override the answers, but they weren’t starting from a blank slate.

Banks, if they did not find a “compensable error,” did not have to pay anything, giving them a strong incentive to find no flaws with their own work.

“It was flawed from the start,” Miller said of the review program. “There was an inherent conflict of interest by just about everyone involved.”

Also on HuffPost:

Related News On Huffington Post:

Bank Of America Supplied Answers For ‘Independent’ Foreclosure Reviewers

ProPublica: The Independent Foreclosure Review is the government’s main effort to compensate homeowners for harm they suffered at the hands of banks — and, as…

Central Valley Foreclosures: Few Homeowners Taking Advantage Of Reviews

MODESTO — Nearly 50,000 Northern San Joaquin Valley homeowners potentially may be owed compensation for financial losses they incurred because of errors made during foreclosure…

Foreclosure-Prevention Roadshow Still Drawing Crowds Indicating Not All Is Well In The Housing Market

* NACA has hosted more than 100 events to assist homeowners * Group plays middleman between borrowers and banks * Foreclosures down from last year,…

Rebecca Mairone, BofA Exec Who Allegedly Enabled Fraud, Now Head Of JPMorgan Chase Foreclosure Review

by Paul Kiel ProPublica, Nov. 9, 2012, 1:18 p.m. An executive who the Justice Department says facilitated a scheme to defraud Fannie Mae and…

Civil Code §2924.12(b) Right to Sue Mortgage Servicers for Injunctive Relief, Damages, Treble Damages, and Right to Attorney’s Fees. : )

5 Dec

prohabition-images

H. Right to Sue Mortgage Servicers for Injunctive Relief, Damages, Treble Damages, and Right to Attorney’s Fees

2013 is going to be a good year

One of the most important provisions of the Act from a lender’s perspective is that it provides borrowers with the right to sue mortgage servicers for injunctive relief before the trustee’s deed upon sale has recorded, or if it has already recorded, to sue for actual economic damages, if the mortgage servicer has not corrected any “material” violation of certain enumerated portions of the Act before the trustee’s deed upon sale recorded. (Civil Code §2924.12(a).) In an area that will certainly open up a Pandora’s Box of litigation, the Act does not define what constitutes a “material” violation of the Act. If a court finds that the violation was intentional, reckless or willful, the court can award the borrower the greater of treble (triple) damages or $50,000. (Civil Code §2924.12(b).) Furthermore, a violation of the enumerated provisions of the Act is also deemed to be a violation of the licensing laws if committed by a person licensed as a consumer or commercial finance lender or broker, a residential mortgage lender or servicer, or a licensed real estate broker or salesman. (Civil Code §2924.12(d).) Lastly, in a one-sided attorney’s fee provision that only benefits borrowers, the court may award a borrower who obtains an injunction or receives an award of economic damages as a result of the violation of the Act their reasonable attorney’s fees and costs as the prevailing party. (Civil Code §2924.12(i).) This provides all the more reason for lenders and mortgage servicers to comply with the terms of the Act. This provision for the recovery by only the borrower of their reasonable attorney’s fees makes it more likely that borrowers will file litigation against mortgage lenders or servicers than they otherwise would. Compliance is the lender’s or mortgage servicer’s best defense to litigation under the Act.

Significantly for lenders, as long as the mortgage servicer remedies the material violation of the Act before the trustee’s deed upon sale has recorded, the Act specifically provides that the mortgage servicer shall not be liable under the Act for any violation or damages. (Civil Code §2924.12(b) & (c).) The Act also clarifies that signatories to the National Mortgage Settlement who are in compliance with the terms of that settlement, as they relate to the terms of the Act, will not face liability under the Act. (Civil Code §2924.12(g).

 

Separation of Note and Deed of Trust

16 Aug

From: Charles Cox [mailto:charles@bayliving.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 7:06 AM
To: Charles Cox
Subject: Separation of Note and Deed of Trust

From Attorney Dan Hanecak,

Today I was told by Judge Brown of the Sacramento County Superior Court that Civil Code 2936 does not apply to deeds of trust because the statute states mortgage. I was also told that Carpenter v. Longan did not apply to the statutory framework of Section 2924 and the nonjudicial foreclosure scheme. I pleaded that the security instrument follows the note and is unenforceable if it is separated to no avail.

I do like Judge Brown, so this is by no means an attack on him, but it took me only 10 minutes of research to prove that I was right.

Friggin newbies.

See attached research.

Regards,

Dan

Separation of note and DOT.doc

California’s antideficiency rules latest holding

29 Jun

 

Bank of America v Mitchell (2012)

The Editor’s Take: Watching our courts attempt to steer California’s antideficiency rules through the treacherous currents of multiple security contexts is always somewhat painful. Code of Civil Procedure §580d, enacted in 1939, prohibits recovery of a deficiency judgment after a nonjudicial sale, which seems straightforward enough at the start. But 24 years later, the California Supreme Court held that this prohibition did not apply to a creditor suing on its junior note after having been sold out in a senior foreclosure sale (the “sold-out junior exception”). Roseleaf Corp. v Chierighino (1963) 59 C2d 35, 41, 27 CR 873. But then, 30 years after that, a court of appeal held that this sold-out junior exception did not apply to a creditor who held both the senior and junior notes. Simon v Superior Court (1992) 4 CA4th 63, 71, 5 CR2d 428. So from then on, we had a “being your own junior” exception to the “sold-out junior” exception.

A decade after that came two more exceptions to the exception to the exception: The court in Ostayan v Serrano Reconveyance Co. (2000) 77 CA4th 1411, 1422, 92 CR2d 577, , allowed a two-note-holding creditor to foreclose on its junior deed of trust and sell the property subject to its own senior encumbrance (although that is not a §580d issue). More importantly, National Enters., Inc. v Woods (2001) 94 CA4th 1217, 115 CR2d 37, allowed the holder of two notes to judicially foreclose on the first one and to sell the second note to a third party, who then was held able to sue on it as a sold-out junior. This was technically not a §580d issue, since the senior foreclosure was not by power of sale, but the reasoning made it look like we were going to have a “third party transferee” or “unbundling the package” exception to the “being your own junior” exception of Simon. It began to look like Simon would be eaten away with exceptions, especially when the original lender made a timely divestment of one of its notes.

But instead, we now learn from Mitchell that the Simon doctrine will be applied against a third party transferee who took the junior paper from the common lender after that lender had trustee sold the property under its senior deed of trust. Both National Enters. and Mitchell involved a transfer of the junior loan after a sale under the senior security, differing only with regard to whether the senior foreclosure was judicial or nonjudicial, which distinction should perhaps matter more to the selling senior than to the nonselling junior.

So many factors potentially affect the outcomes in these situations that it is really impossible to make any confident predictions. How much does it matter whether the two loans were made at the same or different times? Whether they were for related or entirely different purposes? Whether one of them was transferred (and before or after the other was foreclosed)? Whether the transferred loan was the senior or junior? Whether the one foreclosed was the senior or junior? Whether the foreclosure was judicial or nonjudicial? I can point out these distinctions, but that doesn’t mean I can forecast their effect on the outcome of the next case that comes up. —Roger Bernhardt

 

204 Cal.App.4th 1199 (2012)

139 Cal. Rptr. 3d 562

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Plaintiff and Appellant,
v.
MICHAEL MITCHELL, Defendant and Respondent.

No. B233924.

Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Four.

April 10, 2012.

1202*1202 The Dreyfuss Firm and Bruce Dannemeyer for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Law Offices of Ulric E. J. Usher, Ulric E. J. Usher and Richard Kavonian for Defendant and Respondent.

OPINION

SUZUKAWA, J.—

Appellant Bank of America’s (Bank) predecessor in interest loaned respondent Michael Mitchell (Mitchell) $315,000 to purchase a home, secured by two notes and first and second deeds of trust. When Mitchell defaulted on the loan, the lender foreclosed and sold the property. The lender then assigned the second deed of trust to the Bank, which initiated the present action to recover the indebtedness evidenced by the note. Mitchell demurred, and the court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend, concluding that the Bank’s action was barred by California’s antideficiency law. The Bank appeals from the judgment of dismissal and from the subsequent award of prevailing party attorney fees to Mitchell. We affirm.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The Bank filed the present action on September 16, 2010, and it filed the operative first amended complaint (complaint), asserting causes of action for 1203*1203 breach of contract, open book account, and money lent, on December 2, 2010. The complaint alleges that Mitchell obtained a loan from GreenPoint Mortgage Funding, Inc. (GreenPoint), on or about September 14, 2006. The loan was evidenced by a note secured by a deed of trust recorded against real property located at 45245 Kingtree Avenue, Lancaster, California (the property). The security for the loan was eliminated by a senior foreclosure sale in 2009. Because Mitchell defaulted on payments owing on the loan, the complaint alleged that he breached the terms of the contract, resulting in damage to the Bank in the principal sum of $63,000, plus interest at the note rate of 11.625 percent from March 1, 2010, through the date of judgment.

Mitchell demurred. Concurrently with his demurrer, he sought judicial notice of several documents, including two deeds of trust, a notice of trustee’s sale, and a trustee’s deed upon sale. On the basis of these documents, he contended that on September 14, 2006, GreenPoint made him two loans to purchase the property, with a note and deed of trust for each loan recorded against the property. The first note and deed of trust were for $252,000, and the second note and deed of trust were for $63,000. Both deeds of trust were recorded on September 21, 2006. Mitchell defaulted on the notes sometime in 2008. A notice of default was recorded, and the property was sold at trustee sale for $53,955.01 on November 6, 2009. More than a year later, on November 18, 2010, GreenPoint assigned the second deed of trust to Bank of America, which subsequently filed the present action to recover on the second note and deed of trust. Mitchell contended that the action was barred by California’s antideficiency legislation, which bars a deficiency judgment following nonjudicial foreclosure of real property.

The trial court granted Mitchell’s request for judicial notice and sustained the demurrer without leave to amend on January 27, 2011, concluding that the Bank’s breach of contract and common counts claims seek recovery of the balance owed on the obligation secured by the second deed of trust and, thus, are barred by the antideficiency statutes as a matter of law. On April 7, 2011, the court awarded Mitchell prevailing party attorney fees of $8,400 and costs of $534.72.

Judgment for Mitchell was entered on July 8, 2011. The Bank appealed from the award of attorney fees on June 17, 2011, and from the judgment on August 8, 2011. We ordered the two appeals consolidated on October 13, 2011.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

“A demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the factual allegations in a complaint. We independently review the sustaining of a demurrer and determine de novo whether the complaint alleges facts sufficient to state a cause of 1204*1204 action or discloses a complete defense. (McCall v. PacifiCare of Cal., Inc. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 412, 415 [106 Cal.Rptr.2d 271, 21 P.3d 1189]Cryolife, Inc. v. Superior Court (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1145, 1152 [2 Cal.Rptr.3d 396].) We assume the truth of the properly pleaded factual allegations, facts that reasonably can be inferred from those expressly pleaded, and matters of which judicial notice has been taken. (Schifando v. City of Los Angeles (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1074, 1081 [6 Cal.Rptr.3d 457, 79 P.3d 569].) We construe the pleading in a reasonable manner and read the allegations in context. (Ibid.)” (City of Industry v. City of Fillmore (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 191, 205 [129 Cal.Rptr.3d 433].)

“If we determine the facts as pleaded do not state a cause of action, we then consider whether the court abused its discretion in denying leave to amend the complaint. (McClain v. Octagon Plaza, LLC [(2008)] 159 Cal.App.4th [784,] 791-792 [71 Cal.Rptr.3d 885].) It is an abuse of discretion for the trial court to sustain a demurrer without leave to amend if the plaintiff demonstrates a reasonable possibility that the defect can be cured by amendment. (Schifando v. City of Los Angeles[,supra,] 31 Cal.4th [at p.] 1081. . . .)” (Estate of Dito (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 791, 800-801 [130 Cal.Rptr.3d 279].)

Attorney fee awards normally are reviewed for abuse of discretion. In the present case, however, the Bank contends that the trial court lacked the authority as a matter of law to award attorney fees in any amount. Accordingly, our review is de novo. (Connerly v. Sate Personnel Bd. (2006) 37 Cal.4th 1169, 1175 [39 Cal.Rptr.3d 788, 129 P.3d 1].)

DISCUSSION

I. The Trial Court Properly Sustained the Demurrer Without Leave to Amend

A. Code of Civil Procedure Section 580d

(1) “`In California, as in most states, a creditor’s right to enforce a debt secured by a mortgage or deed of trust on real property is restricted by statute. Under California law, “the creditor must rely upon his security before enforcing the debt. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 580a, 725a, 726.) If the security is insufficient, his right to a judgment against the debtor for the deficiency may be limited or barred . . . .” [Citation.]’ [Citation.]” (In re Marriage of Oropallo (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 997, 1003 [80 Cal.Rptr.2d 669].)

Code of Civil Procedure section 580d (section 580d) prohibits a creditor from seeking a judgment for a deficiency on all notes “secured by a deed of 1205*1205 trust or mortgage upon real property . . . in any case in which the real property . . . has been sold by the mortgagee or trustee under power of sale contained in the mortgage or deed of trust.”[1] The effect of section 580d is that “`the beneficiary of a deed of trust executed after 1939 cannot hold the debtor for a deficiency unless he uses the remedy of judicial foreclosure. . . .'” (Simon v. Superior Court (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 63, 71 [5 Cal.Rptr.2d 428] (Simon).)

(2) In Roseleaf Corp. v. Chierighino (1963) 59 Cal.2d 35 [27 Cal.Rptr. 873, 378 P.2d 97] (Roseleaf), the California Supreme Court held that where two deeds of trust are held against a single property and the senior creditor nonjudicially forecloses on the property, section 580d does not prohibit the holder of the junior lienor “whose security has been rendered valueless by a senior sale” from recovering a deficiency judgment. (59 Cal.2d at p. 39.) There, defendant Chierighino purchased a hotel from plaintiff Roseleaf Corporation. The consideration for the hotel included three notes, each secured by a second trust deed on parcels owned by Chierighino. After the sale of the hotel, the third parties who held the first trust deeds on the three parcels nonjudicially foreclosed on them, rendering Roseleaf’s second trust deeds valueless. Roseleaf then brought an action to recover the full amount unpaid on the three notes secured by the second trust deeds. (Id. at p. 38.)

The trial court entered judgment for Roseleaf. Chierighino appealed, contending that Roseleaf’s action was barred by section 580d, but the Supreme Court disagreed and affirmed. It explained that the purpose of section 580d was to “put judicial enforcement [of powers of sale] on a parity with private enforcement.” (Roseleaf, supra, 59 Cal.2d at p. 43.) That purpose, the court said, would not be served by applying section 580d against a nonselling junior lienor: “Even without the section the junior has fewer rights after a senior private sale than after a senior judicial sale. He may redeem from a senior judicial sale (Code Civ. Proc., § 701), or he may obtain a deficiency judgment. [Citations.] After a senior private sale, the junior has no right to redeem. This disparity of rights would be aggravated were he also denied a right to a deficiency judgment by section 580d. There is no purpose in denying the junior his single remedy after a senior private sale while leaving 1206*1206 him with two alternative remedies after a senior judicial sale. The junior’s right to recover should not be controlled by the whim of the senior, and there is no reason to extend the language of section 580d to reach that result.” (59 Cal.2d at p. 44.)

In Simon, supra, 4 Cal.App.4th 63, the court held that the rule articulated in Roseleafdid not apply to protect a junior lienor who also held the senior lien. There, Bank of America (Lender) lent the Simons $1,575,000, for which the Simons gave it two separate promissory notes. Each note was secured by a separate deed of trust naming the Bank as beneficiary and describing the same real property (the property). Subsequently, the Simons defaulted on the senior note and the Lender foreclosed. The Lender purchased the property at the nonjudicial foreclosure sale and then filed an action to recover the unpaid balance of the junior note. (Id. at p. 66.)

(3) After detailing the history of the antideficiency legislation and the governing case law, the court held that section 580d barred the Lender’s deficiency causes of action. It noted that in Roseleaf, the Supreme Court explained that the purpose of section 580d was to create parity between judicial and nonjudicial enforcement. Such parity would not be served “if [the Lender] here is permitted to make successive loans secured by a senior and junior deed of trust on the same property; utilize its power of sale to foreclose the senior lien, thereby eliminating the Simons’ right to redeem; and having so terminated that right of redemption, obtain a deficiency judgment against the Simons on the junior obligation whose security [the Lender], thus, made the choice to eliminate.” (Simon, supra, 4 Cal.App.4th at p. 77.) The court continued: “Unlike a true third party sold-out junior, [the Lender’s] right to recover as a junior lienor which is also the purchasing senior lienor is obviously not controlled by the `whim of the senior.’ We will not sanction the creation of multiple trust deeds on the same property, securing loans represented by successive promissory notes from the same debtor, as a means of circumventing the provisions of section 580d. [Fn. omitted.] The elevation of the form of such a contrived procedure over its easily perceived substance would deal a mortal blow to the antideficiency legislation of this state. Assuming, arguendo, legitimate reasons do exist to divide a loan to a debtor into multiple notes thus secured, section 580d must nonetheless be viewed as controlling where, as here, the senior and junior lenders and lienors are identical and those liens are placed on the same real property. Otherwise, creditors would be free to structure their loans to a single debtor, and the security therefor, so as to obtain on default the secured property on a trustee’s sale under a senior deed of trust; thereby eliminate the debtor’s right of redemption thereto; and thereafter effect an excessive recovery by obtaining a deficiency judgment against that debtor on an obligation secured by a junior lien the creditor chose to eliminate.” (Id. at pp. 77-78.)

1207*1207 B. Simon and Roseleaf Bar a Deficiency Judgment in the Present Case

(4) Simon is dispositive of the present case. Here, Mitchell executed two promissory notes, for $252,000 and $63,000, secured by the first and second deeds of trust in the property. As in Simon, the first and second deeds of trust were held by a single lender, GreenPoint. GreenPoint, as beneficiary under the first deed of trust, chose to exercise its power of sale by holding a nonjudicial foreclosure sale. GreenPoint thus was not a “sold-out junior” lienor and would not have been permitted to obtain a deficiency judgment against Mitchell under the rule articulated in Simon. The result is no different because GreenPoint, after the trustee sale, assigned the second deed of trust to the Bank. “An assignment transfers the interest of the assignor to the assignee. Thereafter, `”[t]he assignee `stands in the shoes’ of the assignor, taking his rights and remedies, subject to any defenses which the obligor has against the assignor prior to notice of the assignment.”‘ [Citation.]” (Manson, Iver & York v. Black (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 36, 49 [97 Cal.Rptr.3d 522].) Accordingly, because GreenPoint could not have obtained a deficiency judgment against Mitchell, the Bank also is precluded from doing so.

The Bank urges that Simon is distinguishable because in that case, the lender ultimately purchased the property for a credit bid at its own foreclosure sale, whereas in this case, the property was sold to a third party. The Bank thus contends that “[u]nder Simon if (a) both loans are held by the same lender and (b) that lender acquires the property at the foreclosure sale, the risk of manipulation by the lender is too great, so no deficiency is allowed. But if either is missing, the risk of manipulation is reduced, and a deficiency should be allowed.” Like the trial court, we reject the contention that the lender must have acquired the property at the foreclosure sale forSimon to apply. Although Simon noted the lender’s purchase at the foreclosure sale, that purchase was not material to its holding. Instead, the court’s focus was on the lender’s dual position as holder of the first and second deeds of trust, and its consequent ability to protect its own interest. (Simon, supra, 4 Cal.App.4th at p. 72 [“[The Lender] was not a third party sold-out junior lienholder as was the case inRoseleaf. As the holder of both the first and second liens, [the Lender] was fully able to protect its secured position. It was not required to protect its junior lien from its own foreclosure of the senior lien by the investment of additional funds. Its position of dual lienholder eliminated any possibility that [the Lender], after foreclosure and sale of the liened property under its first lien, might end up with no interest in the secured property, the principal rationale of the court’s decision in Roseleaf.“].)

The Bank further contends that the present case is distinguishable from Simonbecause the presence of a third party purchaser at the foreclosure sale 1208*1208prevented the kind of “manipulation” possible in Simon. According to the Bank, “[w]hen the foreclosure sale results in acquisition by a third party, who competed with the foreclosing lender and all other bidders at the public auction, a low-ball bid is impossible. If the foreclosing lender bids below market, it will be outbid; it will not acquire the property. The lender cannot manipulate the price. The presence of third party bids demonstrates the market is at work to achieve a fair price. Third party bids provide the functional equivalent of a right of redemption. By outbidding the lender, the third party prevents the lender from manipulating the process.” We disagree. Whatever the merits of the Bank’s argument as a matter of policy, it has no support in the statute, and the Bank suggests none. Indeed, nothing in the antideficiency legislation suggests that the presence of a third party bidder at a foreclosure sale excepts the sale from the legislation and permits the lender to seek a deficiency judgment.[2]

For all the foregoing reasons, section 580d bars the deficiency judgment the Bank seeks in the present case and, thus, the trial court properly sustained the demurrer. Because the Bank suggests no way in which the legal defects identified could be cured by amendment, the demurrer was properly sustained without leave to amend.

II. The Trial Court Properly Awarded Mitchell Attorney Fees

A. Relevant Facts

Following the trial court’s order sustaining Mitchell’s demurrer without leave to amend, Mitchell filed a motion for attorney fees pursuant to Civil Code section 1717. Two days later, on February 10, 2011, the Bank filed a request for dismissal with prejudice. It then filed opposition to the motion for attorney fees, contending that there could be no prevailing party within the meaning of Civil Code section 1717 because it had voluntarily dismissed its action.[3]

On March 8, 2011, the trial court vacated the dismissal and granted Mitchell’s motion for attorney fees. It explained that because it had sustained a demurrer to the Bank’s complaint without leave to amend, the Bank did not have a right pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 581 to voluntarily dismiss the action, and the dismissal had been entered in error. It awarded Mitchell attorney fees of $8,400 and costs of $534.72.

1209*1209 B. Analysis

The Bank contends that the trial court lacked authority to award Mitchell attorney fees. It urges that under Code of Civil Procedure section 581, it had an absolute right to dismiss its case voluntarily, so long as it did so with prejudice. Because it did so, there was no prevailing party pursuant to Civil Code section 1717, subdivision (b)(2), and thus the trial court lacked authority to award Mitchell contractual attorney fees.

(5) The Bank is correct that under Civil Code section 1717, a defendant in a contract action is not deemed a prevailing party where the plaintiff voluntarily dismisses the action. (Id., subd. (b)(2) [“Where an action has been voluntarily dismissed or dismissed pursuant to a settlement of the case, there shall be no prevailing party for purposes of this section.”].) Therefore, if the Bank’s dismissal was valid, the Bank is correct that the trial court erred in awarding attorney fees. The trial court determined, however, that the Bank’s dismissal was not valid, the issue to which we now turn.

(6) Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 581, a plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss an action, “with or without prejudice,” at any time before the “actual commencement of trial.” (§ 581, subds. (b)(1), (c).) Further, a plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss an action with prejudice “at any time before the submission of the cause.” (Estate of Somers (1947) 82 Cal.App.2d 757, 759 [187 P.2d 433].) Upon the proper exercise of the right of voluntary dismissal, a trial court “`would thereafter lack jurisdiction to enter further orders in the dismissed action.’ (Wells v. Marina City Properties, Inc. (1981) 29 Cal.3d 781, 784 [176 Cal.Rptr. 104, 632 P.2d 217].) `Alternatively stated, voluntary dismissal of an entire action deprives the court of both subject matter and personal jurisdiction in that case, except for the limited purpose of awarding costs and . . . attorney fees. [Citations.]’ (Gogri v. Jack in the Box, Inc.(2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 255, 261 [82 Cal.Rptr.3d 629].)” (Lewis C. Nelson & Sons, Inc. v. Lynx Iron Corp. (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 67, 76 [94 Cal.Rptr.3d 468].)

A plaintiff’s right to voluntarily dismiss an action before commencement of trial is not absolute, however. (Lewis C. Nelson & Sons, Inc. v. Lynx Iron Corp., supra, 174 Cal.App.4th at pp. 76-77Zapanta v. Universal Care, Inc. (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 1167, 1171 [132 Cal.Rptr.2d 842].) “Code of Civil Procedure section 581 recognizes exceptions to the right; other limitations have evolved through the courts’ construction of the term `commencement of trial.’ These exceptions generally arise where the action has proceeded to a determinative adjudication, or to a decision that is tantamount to an adjudication.” (Harris v. Billings (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 1396, 1402 [20 Cal.Rptr.2d 718].)

1210*1210 (7) The Supreme Court found such a “determinative adjudication” in Goldtree v. Spreckels (1902) 135 Cal. 666 [67 P. 1091] (Goldtree). There, the defendant’s demurrer to each of the plaintiff’s causes of action was sustained without leave to amend as to the first two. The plaintiff then filed a written request to dismiss the entire case, and the court clerk entered an order of dismissal. The trial court vacated the dismissal, and the plaintiff appealed. (Id. at pp. 667-668.) The Supreme Court affirmed: “In our opinion the subdivision of the section 581 of the Code of Civil Procedure in question cannot be restricted in its meaning to trials of the merits after answer, for there may be such a trial on a general demurrer to the complaint as will effectually dispose of the case where the plaintiff has properly alleged all the facts which constitute his cause of action. If the demurrer is sustained, he stands on his pleading and submits to judgment on the demurrer, and, if not satisfied, has his remedy by appeal. In such a case, we think, there would be a trial within the meaning of the code, and the judgment would cut off the right of dismissal, unless it was first set aside or leave given to amend. [¶] The clerk had no authority, therefore, to enter the dismissal, and being void the court rightly set it aside.” (Id. at pp. 672-673.)

(8) The Supreme Court reached a similar result in Wells v. Marina City Properties, Inc., supra, 29 Cal.3d 781 (Wells). There, the trial court sustained the defendant’s demurrer with leave to amend. The plaintiff failed to amend within the time provided, but instead sought to voluntarily dismiss the action without prejudice. The Supreme Court held that the voluntary dismissal was improperly entered: “[O]nce a general demurrer is sustained with leave to amend and plaintiff does not so amend within the time authorized by the court or otherwise extended by stipulation or appropriate order, he can no longer voluntarily dismiss his action pursuant to section 581, subdivision 1, even if the trial court has yet to enter a judgment of dismissal on the sustained demurrer.” (Id. at p. 789.)

In the present case, the trial court sustained defendant’s demurrer without leave to amend on January 27, 2011. Although the trial court had not yet entered a judgment of dismissal when the Bank filed a request for voluntary dismissal on February 10, 2011, as in Goldtree and Wells, the trial court had already made a determinative adjudication on the legal merits of the Bank’s claim. Accordingly, as in those cases, the Bank no longer had the right to voluntarily dismiss under Code of Civil Procedure section 581.

The Bank contends that the present case is distinguishable from Goldtree and Wellsbecause here it sought to dismiss with prejudice, while in those cases the attempted dismissal was without prejudice. We do not agree. The 1211*1211 court rejected a similar contention in Vanderkous v. Conley (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 111 [115 Cal.Rptr.3d 249] (Vanderkous). There, the plaintiff and the defendant formerly had lived together on a multilot parcel owned by the plaintiff. An arbitration award entered after their relationship ended directed the parties to cooperate in a lot line adjustment that would result in the home and a garage on a single lot to be owned by the defendant, with the remainder of the parcel to be owned by the plaintiff. The plaintiff was also to have access and utility easements over the garage area for the benefit of his parcel. The easements were executed by the defendant and recorded, but the garage and surrounding property were never transferred because the plaintiff never recorded either the lot line adjustment or the grant deed to the defendant for the garage and setback area. When the plaintiff subsequently sought to record a subdivision map, the title company that was to record the map refused to do so because the grants of easement by the defendant created a cloud on the plaintiff’s title. The plaintiff thus filed a complaint for declaratory relief and to quiet title. (Id. at pp. 114-115.)

Following a trial, the court filed a statement of decision that ordered the defendant to execute a quitclaim deed in favor of the plaintiff, and ordered the plaintiff to compensate the defendant in an amount equal to the full market value of the garage area. If the parties could not agree on the amount the plaintiff was to pay the defendant, each party was ordered to submit an appraisal for the court’s final determination. The defendant submitted an appraisal that valued the garage area at $410,000, and the plaintiff submitted an appraisal that valued the property at $75,000, but also requested a continuance and an evidentiary hearing on the value of the property. The day before the evidentiary hearing, the plaintiff filed a request for dismissal with prejudice with the clerk. The trial court ruled that the plaintiff’s attempt to dismiss was void ab initio and ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant $199,246 plus attorney fees and costs. (Vanderkous, supra, 188 Cal.App.4th at p. 116.)

(9) The plaintiff appealed, contending that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to set aside his voluntary dismissal of his action and to award attorney fees. (Vanderkous, supra, 188 Cal.App.4th at p. 117.) The court disagreed and affirmed the judgment. It explained: “Section 581, subdivision (d) provides that a complaint may be dismissed with prejudice when the plaintiff abandons it before the final submission of the case.Here, the court’s statement of decision following the three-day court trial, states `[t]he matter was deemed submitted on March 10, 2008, following receipt of closing briefs from both sides.’ The statement of decision resolved Vanderkous’s quiet title cause of action and his claim for declaratory relief, and ordered him to compensate Conley for the fair market value of property she was required to quitclaim to 1212*1212 him. [¶] … [¶] Because Vanderkous has not convinced us that he had an absolute right to dismiss his complaint, we also reject his argument that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to set aside his attempted dismissal. [Citations.] A contrary rule would enable Vanderkous to avoid compliance with the court’s decision and would undermine the trial court’s authority to provide for the orderly conduct of proceedings before it and compel obedience to its judgments, orders, and process. (See § 128, subd. (a).)” (Vanderkous, supra, at pp. 117-118; see also Weil & Brown, Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2011) ¶ 11:28, p. 11-16 (rev. # 1, 2011) [“[O]nce the case is finally submitted for decision, there is no further right to dismiss with prejudice. At that point, plaintiffs cannot avoid an adverse ruling by abandoning the case.”].)

The present case is analogous. As in Vanderkous, the Bank sought to dismiss afterthe court made a dispositive ruling against it, not before. To allow the Bank to dismiss at that late stage would permit procedural gamesmanship inconsistent with the trial court’s authority to provide for the orderly conduct of proceedings before it.

We do not agree with the Bank that its right to dismiss is supported by this division’s decision in Marina Glencoe, L.P. v. Neue Sentimental Film AG (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 874 [85 Cal.Rptr.3d 800] (Marina Glencoe). There, after the plaintiff presented its evidence on the single bifurcated issue of alter ego liability, the defendant moved for judgment. The court heard argument on the motion but did not rule; the following day, before a ruling on the pending motion, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the action with prejudice. The defendant moved for prevailing party attorney fees, and the court denied the motion, concluding that the defendant was not entitled to such fees under Civil Code section 1717. The defendant appealed. We affirmed, noting that because the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed with prejudice, “[i]ts intent was to end the litigation, not to manipulate the judicial process to avoid its inevitable end. This was entirely proper.” (168 Cal.App.4th at p. 878.)

The present case is distinguishable from Marina Glencoe. In Marina Glencoe, the plaintiff dismissed its action before the trial court ruled on a dispositive motion, and thus judgment in the defendant’s favor was not inevitable. In the present case, in contrast, the trial court had already sustained Mitchell’s demurrer without leave to amend, and thus judgment against the Bank had already “ripened to the point of inevitability.” (Marina Glencoe, supra, 168 Cal.App.4th at p. 878.) Accordingly, unlike in Marina Glencoe, the Bank no longer had the right to voluntarily dismiss its action, either with or without prejudice.

1213*1213 DISPOSITION

We affirm the judgment of dismissal and award of attorney fees. Mitchell shall recover his appellate costs.

Willhite, Acting P. J., and Manella, J., concurred.

[1] The full text of section 580d is as follows: “No judgment shall be rendered for any deficiency upon a note secured by a deed of trust or mortgage upon real property or an estate for years therein hereafter executed in any case in which the real property or estate for years therein has been sold by the mortgagee or trustee under power of sale contained in the mortgage or deed of trust.

“This section does not apply to any deed of trust, mortgage or other lien given to secure the payment of bonds or other evidences of indebtedness authorized or permitted to be issued by the Commissioner of Corporations, or which is made by a public utility subject to the Public Utilities Act (Part 1 (commencing with Section 201) of Division 1 of the Public Utilities Code).”

[2] Although not relevant to our analysis, we note that the property’s foreclosure sale purchase price of $53,955.01 does not convincingly demonstrate, as the Bank asserts, that the presence of a third party bidder made a “low-ball bid . . . impossible.”

[3] In its opposition, the Bank represented to the court as follows: “The litigation is over. There will be no appeal.”

 

%d bloggers like this: