CACI No. 4303. Sufficiency and Service of Notice of Termination for Failure to Pay Rent

Judicial Council of California Civil Jury Instructions (2024 edition)

Download PDF
Bgbb6
4303.Sufficiency and Service of Notice of Termination for Failure
to Pay Rent
[Name of plaintiff] contends that [he/she/nonbinary pronoun/it] properly
gave [name of defendant] three days’ notice to pay the rent or vacate the
property. To prove that the notice contained the required information
and was properly given, [name of plaintiff] must prove all of the
following:
1. That the notice informed [name of defendant] in writing that [he/
she/nonbinary pronoun/it] must pay the amount due within three
days or vacate the property;
2. That the notice stated [no more than/a reasonable estimate of] the
amount due, and the name, telephone number, and address of the
person to whom the amount should be paid, and
2. [Use if payment was to be made personally:
2. the usual days and hours that the person would be available to
receive the payment; and]
2. [or: Use if payment was to be made into a bank account:
2. the number of an account in a bank located within five miles of
the rental property into which the payment could be made, and
the name and street address of the bank; and]
2. [or: Use if an electronic funds transfer procedure had been
previously established:
2. that payment could be made by electronic funds transfer; and]
3. That the notice was given to [name of defendant] at least three
days before [insert date on which action was filed].
[The three-day notice period excludes Saturdays, Sundays, and judicial
holidays, but otherwise begins the day after the notice to pay the rent or
vacate the property was given to [name of defendant].]
Notice was properly given if [select one or more of the following manners
of service:]
3. [the notice was delivered to [name of defendant] personally[./; or]]
3. [[name of defendant] was not at [home or work/the commercial
rental property], and the notice was left with a responsible person
at [[name of defendant]’s residence or place of work/the
commercial property], and a copy was also mailed in an envelope
addressed to [name of defendant] at [[his/her/nonbinary pronoun]
residence/the commercial property]. In this case, notice is
1136
Bgbb7
considered given on the date the second notice was [received by
[name of defendant]/placed in the mail][./; or]]
3. [for a residential tenancy:
3. [name of defendant]’s place of residence and work could not be
discovered, or a responsible person could not be found at either
place, and (1) the notice was posted on the property in a place
where it would easily be noticed, (2) a copy was given to a person
living there if someone could be found, and (3) a copy was also
mailed to the address of the rented property in an envelope
addressed to [name of defendant]. In this case, notice is considered
given on the date the second notice was [received by [name of
defendant]/placed in the mail].]
3. [or for a commercial tenancy:
3. at the time of attempted service, a responsible person could not
be found at the commercial rental property through the exercise
of reasonable diligence, and (1) the notice was posted on the
property in a place where it would easily be noticed, and (2) a
copy was also mailed to the address of the commercial property
in an envelope addressed to [name of defendant]. In this case,
notice is considered given on the date the second notice was
[received by [name of defendant]/placed in the mail].]
[A notice stating a reasonable estimate of the amount of rent due that is
within 20 percent of the amount actually due is reasonable unless [name
of defendant] proves that it was not reasonable. In determining the
reasonableness of the estimate, you may consider whether calculating the
amount of rent required information primarily within the knowledge of
[name of defendant] and whether [name of defendant] accurately furnished
that information to [name of plaintiff].]
New August 2007; Revised December 2010, June 2011, December 2011, November
2019, May 2020, May 2021
Directions for Use
Modify this instruction as necessary for rent due on a residential tenancy between
March 1, 2020, and June 30, 2021, including, but not limited to, substitution of the
term “fifteen business days” wherever the term “three days” appears in the essential
factual elements. (See COVID-19 Tenant Relief Act, Code Civ. Proc., § 1179.01 et
seq.; Stats. 2021, ch. 2 (Sen. Bill 91), Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1179.02, 1179.03,
1179.04.)
Use the reasonable-estimate option in the first sentence of element 2 and include the
final paragraph only in cases involving commercial leases. (Code Civ. Proc.,
UNLAWFUL DETAINER CACI No. 4303
1137
Bgbb8
§ 1161.1(a); see also Code Civ. Proc., § 1161.1(e) [presumption that if amount found
to be due is within 20 percent of amount stated in notice, then estimate was
reasonable].)
In element 2, select the applicable manner in which the notice specifies that
payment is to be made; directly to the landlord, into a bank account, or by
electronic funds transfer. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1161(2).)
Select the manner of service used: personal service, substituted service by leaving
the notice at the defendant’s home or place of work or at the commercial rental
property, or substituted service by posting on the property. (See Code Civ. Proc.,
§ 1162.)
There is a conflict in the case law with respect to when the three-day period begins
if substituted service is used. Compare Davidson v. Quinn (1982) 138 Cal.App.3d
Supp. 9, 14 [188 Cal.Rptr. 421] [tenant must be given three days to pay, so period
does not begin until actual notice is received] with Walters v. Meyers (1990) 226
Cal.App.3d Supp. 15, 19-20 [277 Cal.Rptr. 316] [notice is effective when posted
and mailed]. This conflict is accounted for in the second, third, and fourth bracketed
options for the manner of service.
Read the paragraph that follows the elements if any of the three days of the notice
period fell on a Saturday, Sunday, or judicial holiday. (See Code Civ. Proc.,
§ 1161(2).) Judicial holidays are shown on the judicial branch website, www.courts.
ca.gov/holidays.htm.
If a lease specifies a time period for giving notice other than the three-day period,
substitute that time period for three days throughout, provided that it is not less than
three days.
Defective service may be waived if defendant admits receipt of notice. (See Valov v.
Tank (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d 867, 876 [214 Cal.Rptr. 546].) However, if the fact of
service is contested, compliance with the statutory requirements must be shown.
(Palm Property Investments, LLC v. Yadegar (2011) 194 Cal.App.4th 1419, 1425
[123 Cal.Rptr.3d 816].) Therefore, this instruction does not provide an option for the
jury to determine whether or not defective service was waived if there was actual
receipt.
If a commercial lease requires service by a particular method, actual receipt by the
tenant will not cure the landlord’s failure to comply with the service requirements of
the lease. (Culver Center Partners East #1, L.P. v. Baja Fresh Westlake Village, Inc.
(2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 744, 752 [110 Cal.Rptr.3d 833].) Whether the same rule
applies to a residential lease that specifies a method of service has not yet been
decided.
The Tenant Protection Act of 2019 and/or local ordinances may impose additional
notice requirements for the termination of a rental agreement. (See Civ. Code,
§ 1946.2(a) [“just cause” requirement for termination of certain residential
tenancies], (b) [“just cause” defined].) This instruction should be modified
accordingly if applicable.
CACI No. 4303 UNLAWFUL DETAINER
1138
Bgbb9
Sources and Authority
• Conclusive Presumption of Receipt of Rent Sent to Address Provided in Notice.
Code of Civil Procedure section 1161(2).
• COVID-19 Tenant Relief Act. Code of Civil Procedure section 1179.01 et seq.
• Senate Bill 91 (Stats. 2021, ch. 2). Code of Civil Procedure section 1179.02 et
seq.
• Commercial Tenancy: Estimate of Rent Due in Notice. Code of Civil Procedure
1161.1.
• Manner of Service of Notice. Code of Civil Procedure section 1162.
• Tenant Protection Act of 2019. Civil Code section 1946.2.
• “ ‘[P]roper service on the lessee of a valid three-day notice to pay rent or quit is
an essential prerequisite to a judgment declaring a lessor’s right to possession
under section 1161, subdivision 2. [Citations.]’ [Citation.] ‘A lessor must allege
and prove proper service of the requisite notice. [Citations.] Absent evidence the
requisite notice was properly served pursuant to section 1162, no judgment for
possession can be obtained. [Citations.]’ ” (Borsuk v. Appellate Division of
Superior Court (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 607, 611 [195 Cal.Rptr.3d 581].)
• “A three-day notice must contain ‘the amount which is due.’ A notice which
demands rent in excess of the amount due does not satisfy this requirement. This
rule ensures that a landlord will not be entitled to regain possession in an
unlawful detainer action unless the tenant has had the opportunity to pay the
delinquent rent.” (Bevill v. Zoura (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 694, 697 [32
Cal.Rptr.2d 635], internal citations and footnote omitted.)
• “As compared to service of summons, by which the court acquires personal
jurisdiction, service of the three-day notice is merely an element of an unlawful
detainer cause of action that must be alleged and proven for the landlord to
acquire possession.” (Borsuk, supra, 242 Cal.App.4th at pp. 612-613.)
• “[W]e do not agree that a proper notice may not include anything other than
technical rent. It is true that subdivision 2 of Code of Civil Procedure section
1161 relates to a default in the payment of rent. However, the subdivision refers
to the ‘lease or agreement under which the property is held’ and requires the
notice state ‘the amount which is due.’ The language is not ‘the amount of rent
which is due’ or ‘the rent which is due.’ We think the statutory language is
sufficiently broad to encompass any sums due under the lease or agreement
under which the property is held.” (Canal-Randolph Anaheim, Inc. v. Wilkoski
(1978) 78 Cal.App.3d 477, 492 [144 Cal.Rptr. 474].)
• “[T]he service and notice provisions in the unlawful detainer statutes and [Code
of Civil Procedure] section 1013 are mutually exclusive, and thus, section 1013
does not extend the notice periods that are a prerequisite to filing an unlawful
detainer action.” (Losornio v. Motta (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 110, 112 [78
Cal.Rptr.2d 799].)
UNLAWFUL DETAINER CACI No. 4303
1139
Bgbba
• “Section 1162 does not authorize service of a three-day notice to pay rent or quit
by mail delivery alone, certified or otherwise. It provides for service by: personal
delivery; leaving a copy with a person of suitable age and discretion at the
renter’s residence or usual place of business and sending a copy through the mail
to the tenant’s residence; or posting and delivery of a copy to a person there
residing, if one can be found, and sending a copy through the mail. Strict
compliance with the statute is required.” (Liebovich v. Shahrokhkhany (1997) 56
Cal.App.4th 511, 516 [65 Cal.Rptr.2d 457], original italics, internal citation
omitted.)
• “We . . . hold that service made in accordance with section 1162, subdivision 3,
as applied to section 1161, subdivision 2, must be effected in such a manner as
will give a tenant the three days of written notice required by the Legislature in
which he may cure his default in the payment of rent.” (Davidson, supra, 138
Cal.App.3d Supp. at p. 14.)
• “We . . . hold that service of the three-day notice by posting and mailing is
effective on the date the notice is posted and mailed.” (Walters, supra, 226
Cal.App.3d Supp. at p. 20.)
• “An unlawful detainer action based on failure to pay rent must be preceded by a
three-day notice to the tenant to pay rent or quit the premises. Failure to state
the exact amount of rent due in the notice is fatal to the subsequent unlawful
detainer action.” (Lynch & Freytag v. Cooper (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 603, 606,
fn. 2 [267 Cal.Rptr. 189], internal citations omitted.)
• “[D]efendant admitted in his answer that he ‘ultimately received [the relevant]
notice’ but ‘affirmatively allege[d] that he was not properly and legally served’
with a valid notice. We find that, under the circumstances of this case, the
defendant waived any defect in the challenged service of the notice under
section 1162, subdivision 1.” (Valov,supra, 168 Cal.App.3d at p. 876.)
• “In the cases discussed . . . , a finding of proper service turned on a party’s
acknowledgment or admission the notice in question was in fact received. In the
present case, defendant denied, in his answer and at trial, that he had ever
received the three-day notice. Because there was no admission of receipt in this
case, service by certified mail did not establish or amount to personal delivery.
Further, there was no evidence of compliance with any of the three methods of
service of a three-day notice to pay rent or quit provided in section 1162.
Therefore, the judgment must be reversed.” (Liebovich, supra, 56 Cal.App.4th at
p. 518.)
• “[Code of Civil Procedure section 1162 specifies] three ways in which service of
the three-day notice may be effected on a residential tenant: . . . . As explained
in Liebovich, supra, . . . , ‘[w]hen the fact of service is contested, compliance
with one of these methods must be shown or the judgment must be reversed.’ ”
(Palm Property Investments, LLC, supra, 194 Cal.App.4th at p. 1425.)
• “In commercial leases the landlord and commercial tenant may lawfully agree to
notice procedures that differ from those provided in the statutory provisions
CACI No. 4303 UNLAWFUL DETAINER
1140
Bgbbb
governing unlawful detainer.” (Culver Center Partners East #1, L.P.,supra, 185
Cal.App.4th at p. 750.)
• “[E]ven if some policy rationale might support such a waiver/forfeiture [by
actual receipt] rule in the residential lease context, there is no basis to apply it in
the commercial context where matters of service and waiver are prescribed in
the lease itself. Nothing in the parties’ lease suggests actual receipt of a notice to
quit results in the waiver or forfeiture of [tenant]’s right to service accomplished
in the manner prescribed. To the contrary, the lease specifically provides, ‘No
covenant, term or condition, or breach’ of the lease ‘shall be deemed waived
except if expressly waived in a written instrument executed by the waiving
party.’ Although [tenant’s agent] acted on the notice to quit by attempting to
deliver the rent check, neither her fortuitous receipt of the notice nor her actions
in response to it constitutes an express waiver of the notice provisions in the
lease.” (Culver Center Partners East #1, L.P.,supra, 185 Cal.App.4th at p. 752,
internal citation omitted.)
Secondary Sources
12 Witkin, Summary of California Law (11th ed. 2017) Real Property, §§ 753,
755-758, 760
1 California Landlord-Tenant Practice (Cont.Ed.Bar 2d ed.) §§ 8.26-8.68
1 California Eviction Defense Manual (Cont.Ed.Bar 2d ed.) §§ 5.2, 6.10-6.30, Ch. 8
Friedman et al., California Practice Guide: Landlord-Tenant, Ch. 5-G, Eviction
Controls, ¶¶ 5:224.3, 5:277.1 et seq. (The Rutter Group)
Friedman et al., California Practice Guide: Landlord-Tenant, Ch. 7-C, Bases For
Terminating Tenancy, ¶¶ 7:98.10, 7:327 (The Rutter Group)
7 California Real Estate Law and Practice, Ch. 200, Termination: Causes and
Procedures, § 200.21 (Matthew Bender)
7 California Real Estate Law and Practice, Ch. 210, Unlawful Detainer, §§ 210.21,
210.22 (Matthew Bender)
Matthew Bender Practice Guide: California Landlord-Tenant Litigation, Ch. 5,
Unlawful Detainer, 5.11, 5.12
29 California Forms of Pleading and Practice, Ch. 332, Landlord and Tenant: The
Tenancy, § 332.28 (Matthew Bender)
29 California Forms of Pleading and Practice, Ch. 333, Landlord and Tenant:
Eviction Actions, § 333.11 (Matthew Bender)
23 California Points and Authorities, Ch. 236, Unlawful Detainer, §§ 236.13,
236.13A (Matthew Bender)
Miller & Starr, California Real Estate 4th, §§ 34:183-34:187 (Thomson Reuters)
UNLAWFUL DETAINER CACI No. 4303
1141

© Judicial Council of California.