DELAURA v.BECKETT
Filed 2/7/06; pub. order 3/9/06 (see end of opn.)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
MARY E. CRIGHTON DELAURA, as Trustee, etc., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. JAMES BECKETT, Defendant and Respondent. | A109948 (San Francisco County Super. Ct. No. 436218) |
Mary E. Creighton DeLaura appeals from a judgment dismissing her first amended complaint for declaratory relief against her tenant, James Beckett. The court entered the judgment of dismissal after it sustained without leave to amend Beckett's demurrer to the complaint on the ground that it failed to allege a justiciable controversy. We conclude that the demurrer was properly sustained because the applicability of certain provisions of the San Francisco Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance (rent ordinance) to Beckett's tenancy is more appropriately resolved through an administrative hearing before the San Francisco Rent Board.[1] Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.
Factual and Procedural Background
DeLaura, in her capacity as trustee for the Mary E. Creighton DeLaura trust, owns residential property at 20 Vulcan Street in San Francisco. There are two free-standing buildings on the property. Beckett rents one of the buildings, a single family dwelling, pursuant to a written lease agreement.
In February 2004, when Beckett learned that DeLaura was planning to subdivide the property to create two separate parcels, he wrote to the San Francisco Department of Public Works requesting a public hearing on the subdivision application. In that letter, Beckett asserted that he was â€