Quantcast

**Tenant Wins Eviction Battle Over Technicality in Notice**

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RECORD

Thursday, November 21, 2024

**Tenant Wins Eviction Battle Over Technicality in Notice**

State Court
Webp bytpsur71zydvlvrblng3ac2uana

Teri L. Jackson, Presiding Justice Division Five | https://www.usfca.edu/

The City of Alameda's legal battle against a tenant over unpaid rent has hit a significant roadblock, with the court ruling in favor of the tenant due to technicalities in the eviction notice. The complaint was filed by the City of Alameda in the Alameda County Superior Court on April 12, 2022, against Shelby Sheehan.

The case centers around an unlawful detainer action initiated by the City of Alameda after tenant Shelby Sheehan failed to pay rent for over 17 months starting from December 2020. On April 5, 2022, the City served Sheehan with a three-day notice to pay rent or vacate the premises. The notice specified that payment should be made to "City of Alameda c/o River Rock Real Estate Group." However, Sheehan contested this notice, arguing it was defective because it did not provide the name of a natural person to whom rent could be paid and contained vague demands for unspecified sums of rent.

In response, the City argued that under section 1161(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, "person" includes corporations and public entities, not just natural persons. Despite this argument, the trial court sided with Sheehan, concluding that section 1161(2) requires identification of a natural person and found additional ambiguities in the payment methods stated in the notice.

On appeal, while agreeing with some aspects of the trial court's decision regarding defects in the notice, it was held that "person" as used in section 1161(2) includes both corporations and natural persons. Nevertheless, due to discrepancies such as incorrect spelling and incomplete naming of "RiverRock Real Estate Group," which led to confusion about where and how payments should be made, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s judgment favoring Sheehan.

The City is seeking relief from these judgments but faces challenges due to procedural errors in their notices. They aim for clear guidelines on what constitutes a valid three-day notice under section 1161(2), especially concerning identifying payees correctly.

Representing parties include attorneys from Farella Braun + Martel for Plaintiff (City of Alameda) and East Bay Community Law Center for Defendant (Shelby Sheehan). The case was presided over by Hon. Victoria Kolakowski at Alameda County Superior Court under Case ID No. A168300.

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News