Chief Justice Suspends Effort to End Freeze on Eviction Proceedings
The decision is an about-face for judiciary leaders who said just days ago that eviction proceedings could resume as soon as courthouses restart operations halted due to COVID-19.
June 10, 2020 at 07:58 PM
3 minute read
California's chief justice has halted a Judicial Council vote to end a freeze on eviction proceedings, citing talks with the governor and state lawmakers.
The council was scheduled to submit votes Wednesday on an order that would have allowed courts to begin processing evictions and judicial foreclosures again after Aug. 3.
"After discussions with the governor, legislative leaders, and Judicial Council members—as well as hearing from residents with many different viewpoints—I have suspended for the time being the vote on the emergency rules dealing with evictions and judicial foreclosures," Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye said in a statement. "I believe the executive and legislative branches will need more time to sort through various policy proposals."
The decision is an about-face for judiciary leaders who said just days ago that eviction proceedings could resume as soon as courthouses restart operations halted due to COVID-19.
"The judicial branch cannot usurp the responsibility of the other two branches to deal with the myriad impacts of the pandemic," Cantil-Sakauye said. "We will work with the governor and legislative leaders on an updated time frame for amending, sunsetting, or repealing the Judicial Council's rules, orders, or other actions taken under the authority assigned to us under the governor's executive order."
The governor's press office had no immediate comment.
The halt on processing evictions was one of 13 emergency rules adopted by the council in April to deal with courthouse closures. The rule stops eviction proceedings until 90 days after Gov. Gavin Newsom lifts the pandemic-related state of emergency.
The rule—and what had been its impending repeal—was hotly debated among landlords, renters and policymakers. The California Apartment Association called the rule "disheartening" and an unfair denial of property owners' access to local courts.
"Without the ability to legally and peacefully regain possession of property, rental housing providers are powerless to combat many of the biggest problems they face at a time when it is more important than ever for Californians to have a safe place to call home," the association's chief executive officer, Thomas Bannon, wrote in a May 11 letter to the Judicial Council.
Many legislative Democrats, however, criticized the repeal vote, saying that the economic impacts of the pandemic continue.
"We are very grateful that the chief justice considered feedback and stopped the vote," Assemblyman David Chiu, D-San Francisco, said in an email. "This allows the Legislature time to agree upon and pass a solution to avoid a wave of evictions in the wake of COVID-19."
Chiu on Wednesday introduced legislation that would block the eviction of renters during the COVID-19 emergency.
The council's vote on a circulating order to rescind the $0 bail schedule June 20 was expected to be announced later on Wednesday.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBuchalter Hires Longtime Sheppard Mullin Real Estate Partner as Practice Chair
After Solving Problems for Presidents, Ron Klain Now Applying Legal Prowess to Helping Airbnb Overturn NYC Ban
7 minute readDOJ, 10 State AGs File Amended Antitrust Complaint Against RealPage and Big Landlords
4 minute readInsurers Dodge Sherwin-Williams' Claim for $102M Lead Paint Abatement Payment, State High Court Rules
Trending Stories
- 1Google Makes Appeal to Overturn Jury Verdict Branding the Play Store as an Illegal Monopoly
- 2First Amendment Litigator Returns to Gibson Dunn
- 3In Record Year for Baker Botts, Revenue Up 11.8%, PEP Up 17.6%
- 4Loopholes, DNA Collection and Tech: Does Your Consent as a User of a Genealogy Website Override Another Person’s Fourth Amendment Right?
- 5Free Microsoft Browser Extension Is Costing Content Creators, Class Action Claims
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250