Bill Text: CA AB2508 | 2013-2014 | Regular Session | Amended
Bill Title: Unlawful detainer: pleadings.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2014-05-27 - From committee without further action pursuant to Joint Rule 62(a). [AB2508 Detail]
Download: California-2013-AB2508-Amended.html
BILL NUMBER: AB 2508 AMENDED
BILL TEXT
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 7, 2014
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Fox
FEBRUARY 21, 2014
An act to amend Sections 592 and 1171 of
Section 431.40 of, and add Section 1170.1 to, the Code of Civil
Procedure, relating to unlawful detainer.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2508, as amended, Fox. Unlawful detainer: trial by
jury pleadings .
Existing law provides that in any action in which the demand,
exclusive of interest, or the value of the property in controversy
does not exceed $1,000, the defendant, in lieu of demurrer or other
answer, may file a general written denial and a brief statement of
any new matter constituting a defense.
This bill would exempt specified actions for unlawful detainer
from these provisions.
Existing law provides that a tenant of real property for a term
less than life who continues in possession of the property without
permission, after the expiration of the term for which it is let, or
after default in the payment of rent, as specified, is guilty of
unlawful detainer. Existing law authorizes a defendant tenant to
assert certain affirmative defenses in an unlawful detainer action
for a residential property, including that the property in
untenantable because it substantially lacks specified affirmative
standard characteristics or that the lessor has failed to repair
dilapidations, as specified.
This bill would require, in an unlawful detainer action for
default in payment of rent for a residential property in which
specified affirmative defenses are asserted, that a defendant set
forth and allege specified facts in support of those affirmative
defenses in the defendant's answer to the complaint, as specified.
The bill would require the Judicial Council to create a form, on or
before July 1, 2016, that may be used by a defendant to assert the
facts required by the bill to assert those affirmative defenses to an
unlawful detainer action. The bill would delay the operative date of
its provisions, other than the requirement that the Judicial Council
to create a form, until July 1, 2016.
Existing law governs unlawful detainer proceedings, including a
requirement that courts give such actions scheduling preference over
other civil actions so that the matter may be quickly heard and
determined. Existing law requires that an unlawful detainer action be
tried by a jury, unless waived by the parties, whenever an issue of
fact is presented in the pleadings.
This bill would require specified unlawful detainer actions that
present a question of fact in the pleadings to be tried by the court.
The bill would require that the court's determination be subject to
de novo review by the superior court upon appeal. The bill would
require the appeal to be tried by jury, unless waived.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no
yes . State-mandated local program: no.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 431.40 of the Code
of Civil Procedure is amended to read:
431.40. (a) Any provision of law to the contrary notwithstanding,
in any action in which the demand, exclusive of interest, or the
value of the property in controversy does not exceed one thousand
dollars ($1000), the defendant at his option, in lieu of demurrer or
other answer, may file a general written denial and a brief statement
of any new matter constituting a defense.
(b) Nothing in this section excuses the defendant from complying
with the provisions of law applicable to a cross-complaint, and any
cross-complaint of the defendant shall be subject to the requirements
applicable in any other action.
(c) The general written denial described in subdivision (a) shall
be on a blank available at the place of filing and shall be in a form
prescribed by the Judicial Council. This form need not be verified.
(d) This section does not apply to an action for unlawful detainer
brought pursuant to Section 1161.
SEC. 2. Section 1170.1 is added to the
Code of Civil Procedure , to read:
1170.1. (a) This section applies in any unlawful detainer action
brought pursuant to Section 1161 for default in payment of rent for a
residential property in which the defendant asserts one or more of
the following affirmative defenses in his or her answer:
(1) Breach of the warranty of habitability.
(2) The defendant exercised the repair and deduct remedy, and the
plaintiff did not give proper credit.
(3) The defendant tendered rent prior to the expiration of the
notice, and the plaintiff did not accept it.
(b) To assert an affirmative defense set forth in subdivision (a)
the defendant shall allege facts applicable to that affirmative
defense, as follows:
(1) With respect to the breach of the warranty of habitability,
for each requirement of habitability that the plaintiff failed to
provide, the answer shall allege facts demonstrating all of the
following:
(A) The specific nature of the failed requirement.
(B) Facts demonstrating the failure to be substantial.
(C) The date on which the condition occurred.
(2) With respect to use of the repair and deduct remedy, the
answer shall allege facts demonstrating all of the following:
(A) The habitability requirement that the plaintiff substantially
failed to provide.
(B) The date on which notice was provided to the plaintiff of the
condition that required repair.
(C) The circumstances under which a reasonable time for the
plaintiff to perform the repair was fewer than 30 days.
(D) The amount of money the defendant spent to make the repair.
(E) The date notice was given to the plaintiff of the defendant's
expenditure.
(F) The month for which the plaintiff failed to provide credit
against rent for the expenditure.
(G) A statement that the defendant has not exercised the right to
repair and deduct more than once within the 12-month period before
the month for which the cost of the repair was deducted from the
rent.
(3) With respect to the defense that rent was tendered before the
expiration of the notice and was not accepted, the answer shall
allege facts demonstrating all of the following:
(A) That after service of the three-day notice, but before the
three-day period expired, the defendant presented the full amount of
rent to the plaintiff.
(B) That the plaintiff refused to accept the payment.
(C) The form of the payment tendered.
(c) In addition to the facts specified in subdivision (b), the
defendant shall include one of the following statements in the
answer:
(1) A statement that, at the time of filing the answer, the
defendant has funds sufficient to satisfy the judgment sought by the
plaintiff and whether those funds will be retained pending the
outcome of the action.
(2) A statement that, at the time of filing the answer, the
defendant does not have sufficient funds available to satisfy a
judgment in the plaintiff's favor and an explanation of why those
funds are not available.
(d) The supporting facts and statements described in subdivisions
(b) and (c) of this section shall be included and verified by the
defendant in a form prescribed by the Judicial Council that is
available at the place of filing.
(e) The Judicial Council shall, on or before July 1, 2016, develop
a new form or revise an existing form that may be used by a
defendant to assert the affirmative defenses and supporting facts set
forth in this section to an unlawful detainer action.
(f) Subdivisions (a) to (d), inclusive, of this section shall
become operative on July 1, 2016.
SECTION 1. Section 592 of the Code of Civil
Procedure is amended to read:
592. (a) In actions for the recovery of specific, real, or
personal property, with or without damages, or for money claimed as
due upon contract, or as damages for breach of contract, or for
injuries, an issue of fact shall be tried by a jury unless a jury
trial is waived, or a reference is ordered, as provided in this Code.
Where in these cases there are issues both of law and fact, the
issue of law must be first disposed of. In other cases, issues of
fact must be tried by the Court, subject to its power to order any
such issue to be tried by a jury, or to be referred to a referee, as
provided in this Code.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), an unlawful detainer action
filed pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 1159) of Title 3
of Part 3 is not be subject to this section and shall be tried by
jury as prescribed in Section 1171.
SEC. 2. Section 1171 of the Code of Civil
Procedure is amended to read:
1171. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), an action that
presents an issue of fact shall be initially tried by the court,
without a jury. The court's determination shall be subject to appeal
in the superior court of the county in which the complaint is filed,
and shall be tried de novo by a jury, unless a jury trial is waived.
(b) (1) An action that presents an issue of fact shall be tried by
a jury in the first instance, unless a jury trial is waived, if
either of the following apply:
(A) The amount of the damages claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars
($10,000).
(B) The action pertains to a written lease that has an unexpired
term of 30 days or more at the time the complaint is filed.
(2) 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.
