6 Cal. 5th 474
Cal.2018Background
- Westlake Village owned property leased to Westlake Health (a skilled nursing operator). A deed of trust secured a bank loan on the property.
- After default, the bank sold the deed and note to Dr. Leevil, which conducted a nonjudicial trustee’s sale and was the successful bidder.
- Dr. Leevil served a three-day written notice to quit on Westlake Health the day after the trustee’s sale, but recorded the trustee’s deed (perfecting title) five days after serving the notice and 40 days before filing unlawful detainer.
- Trial court entered judgment for Dr. Leevil on stipulated facts; the Court of Appeal affirmed, holding perfection of title need only precede filing the unlawful detainer, not service of the three-day notice.
- The California Supreme Court granted review limited to whether a purchaser at a deed-of-trust trustee’s sale must perfect title before serving the three-day notice to quit under Code Civ. Proc. §1161a(b).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a purchaser at a trustee’s sale must perfect title before serving a three-day notice to quit under §1161a(b) | Service of the three-day notice may occur immediately after acquisition; perfection need only occur before filing unlawful detainer | Title must be perfected (recording trustee’s deed) before serving the three-day notice; otherwise the notice is premature | The purchaser must perfect title before serving the three-day notice; notice served earlier is void |
Key Cases Cited
- United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co., 4 Cal.5th 1082 (statutory interpretation principles)
- Hughes v. Board of Architectural Examiners, 17 Cal.4th 763 (significance of verb tense in statutes)
- Kessler v. Bridge, 161 Cal.App.2d Supp. 837 (defining when title is duly perfected)
- Vella v. Hudgins, 20 Cal.3d 251 (history and scope of §1161a)
- Francis v. West Virginia Oil Co., 174 Cal. 168 (historic limitation of unlawful detainer to landlord–tenant disputes)
- Orcilla v. Big Sur, Inc., 244 Cal.App.4th 982 (limits on issues resolvable in §1161a unlawful detainer)
- McLitus (App. Div.) v. U.S. Financial, L.P., 6 Cal.App.5th Supp. 1 (contrasting view requiring perfection before notice)
- Cheney v. Trauzettel, 9 Cal.2d 158 (matters not properly raised in summary unlawful detainer)