Legal Opinion · Concurrence
Borsuk v. Superior Court
Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California
Decided July 22, 2015No. BS154988Published
1Concurrence
KUMAR, Acting P. J.,
Concurring.—I agree a writ should issue because the current state of the law requires the trial court to consider extrinsic evidence in ruling on a motion to quash an unlawful detainer summons. But, I respectfully write separately because my approach to granting writ relief would be slightly different from that of the majority and would include a suggestion that a higher court revisit the issue resolved by currently binding authority—Delta Imports, Inc. v. Municipal Court (1983) 146 Cal.App.3d 1033, 1034-1037 [194 Cal.Rptr. 685] (Delta).
A. The Three-day Notice Requirement
1.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Greener v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Delta Imports, Inc. v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
- Air MacHine Com SRL v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- SCHOOL DIST. OF OKALOOSA CTY. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.