Skip to main content

Please clarify California Civil Code Section 1951.4 as it relates to the details.

Murrieta, CA |

Subtenant is striving to prohibit the landlord and tenant from engaging in collusion to end the master lease prematurely in order to squeeze out the sublessee. Subtenant & master tenant's rental agreement, authorized by the landlord, is simply month to month. Master lease between master tenant & the homeowner/landlord is for a remaining 5 additional years. Please clarify California Civil Code Section 1951?

+ Read More

Attorney answers 2

Posted

The very first sentence in that statute says "The remedy described in this section is available only if the lease provides for this remedy." You should discuss your lease in greater detail with an attorney.

This is not intended to be legal advice nor does it establish an attorney-client relationship.

Posted

The first reply is 100% correct. Leases are the controlling document to look to for the general rights and obligations for the parties to that contract. Therefore, it is impossible to answer your question without seeing the lease.

On a side note, the facts are rather confusing. A Master Tenant, with the facts given here, in a non-rent/eviction control jurisdiction, can terminate the sub-tenant with proper notice, etc. What would be the point to have an accord between the Master-Tenant and the Lessor to terminate the lease before its stated term.

Accordingly, this presented fact pattern is rather confusing and full of conclusive statements as opposed to actual facts. You will need an attorney to review the facts of the matter and the controlling documents, lease, sub-lease, etc. to go any further.

My answers are for general information only. They are not legal advice. Answers assume California law. I am licensed in California, only. Answers must not be relied upon. Legal advice and counsel must be based on the interplay between specific exact facts and the law. This forum does not allow for the discussion of that interplay. My answer to any specific question would likely be different if that interplay were explored during an attorney-client relationship. I provide legal advice and counsel during the course of an attorney-client relationship only. The exchange of information through this forum does not establish such a relationship. That relationship is established only by personal and direct consultation with me followed by the execution of a written attorney-client agreement signed by each of us. The communications on this website are not privileged or confidential. I assume no duty to anyone by my participation on Avvo because I have answered or commented on a question. Specifically, I assume no duty to respond to any question, comment, telephone call, or email. All legal proceedings involve deadlines and time limiting statutes. So that legal rights are not lost for failure to timely take appropriate action and because I do not provide legal advice or counsel in answer to any question, if you are an interested party you should promptly and personally consult an attorney licensed in the appropriate jurisdiction for advice and counsel. See, also, Avvo's terms and conditions of use, specifically item 9, incorporated by this reference.

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer