CASE STUDY
Attorney Daniel Cheung overcomes a barrage of baseless claims made by a non-paying tenant to obtain a Judgment and Writ of Possession. 

Everything but the kitchen sink was thrown at Bornstein Law after our client attempted to remove a problematic tenant. Through proper counsel, our client was able to debunk the logic behind various last-ditch efforts to keep the problematic tenant housed.

This serves as a testament that no matter how hard a tenant or their free legal representation fights, Bornstein Law can accomplish the goals of clients to remove non-paying tenants from the premises.

 

 

Resolving landlord-tenant disputes is a little like a game of tug-of-war. The harder each side pulls on the rope, the tighter the knot becomes. At Bornstein Law, our goal is to untangle the matter and resolve it quickly and efficiently.

98% of cases in unlawful detainer (eviction) actions settle, but some tenants cling to the rental unit by their fingernails and, at the 11th hour, make baseless accusations to stave off eviction. Of course, problematic renters have no shortage of free legal assistance from tenants’ attorneys who use means to delay or prolong the proceeding or to cause needless expense. Bornstein Law can articulate a counter-narrative to these false or inventive reasons to keep problematic tenants housed.

What we were up against

In the Answer to the Eviction Complaint, the tenant raised several affirmative defenses to the eviction action. Namely:

  • Plaintiff (landlord) has breached the warranty to provide habitable premises.

  • Plaintiff waived, changed, or cancelled the notice to quit.

  • Plaintiff accepted rent after the notice to quit expired.

  • Plaintiff is barred from seeking possession due to the doctrine of unclean hands.

  • The Complaint fails to state a cause of action.

  • The three-day notice to pay rent or quit violates California Civil Code § 1942.4

At stake was $16,371 in past-due rent and holdover damages. After successfully litigating this case, our client was able to rest soundly at night knowing that we had removed a thorn in their side.

 

Some interesting facts of the case

We have always said that housing providers and their agents need to be the eyes and ears of their property. Sometimes, living arrangements become a game of musical chairs to the point that landlords and property managers do not know who is residing on the premises. The case at hand highlights the need to understand the legal relationships between multiple parties.

The original tenant welcomed in a roommate without the landlord's knowledge, and in turn, yet another roommate was brought in who failed to pay the rent and continued to squat at the premises. Our office was tasked with going to trial against this problematic individual and convincing the judge that the occupant had no legal basis for maintaining occupancy.

In a bizarre turn of events, we had to hear many conspiracy theories from the erratic occupant at trial. These outlandish claims were not convincing to the judge. Rather than entertaining these rants, Bornstein Law focused on the legal issues at play, cited the law, and persuaded the court to allow our client to recover possession of the unit.

Although cases can take twists and turns, our firm has a solid grasp of the law. While our strong preference is to avoid courts altogether and resolve disputes in the most efficient fashion, Bornstein Law is certainly not shy in advocating for the rights of property owners in front of a judge or jury, and we have a proven track record of results.