Legal Opinion
Cacho v. Boudreau
California Supreme Court
Decided January 11, 2007No. S133378PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KENNARD, J.
The state Mobilehome Residency Law (Civ. Code, § 798 et seq.) 1 regulates relations between the owners and the residents of mobile-home parks. Three of its provisions are at issue here. The first provision states: “A homeowner shall not be charged a fee for other than rent, utilities, and incidental reasonable charges for services actually rendered.” (§ 798.31.) Under the second provision, which applies only in parks subject to local rent control laws, a local agency that administers a rent control law must allow a park owner to separately charge park residents for certain…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- DeVita v. County of NapaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Mejia v. ReedCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- People v. American Contractors Indemnity Co.California Supreme Court · 2004
- Sherwin-Williams Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Delaney v. BakerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Action Apartment Ass'n v. City of Santa MonicaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- People v. C.H.California Supreme Court · 2011
- Hoffman v. SMITHWOODS RV PARK, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- SC MANUFACTURED HOMES, INC. v. LiebertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Nativi v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.California Court of Appeal · 2014
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.