HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 33-20 Re Emergency Orders on Evictions Foreclosures and Price GougingRESOLUTION NO. 33-20
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY STATE OF CALIFORNIA, REGARDING
PUBLICATION OF EMERGENCY ORDERS ON EVICTIONS,
FORECLOSURES AND PRICE GOUGING (COVID-19 STATE OF
EMERGENCY)
THE CITY COUNCIL
City of Morro Bay, California
WHEREAS, in December 2019, an outbreak of respiratory illness due to a novel
coronavirus (a disease now known as COVID-19) was first identified in Wuhan City, Hubei
Province, China; and,
WHEREAS, COVID-19 is a respiratory disease that may result in serious illness or death
and is easily transmissible from person to person; and
WHEREAS, as of April 8, 2020, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
("CDC") has reported in the United States there are over 395,000 COVID-19 cases and over
12,750 deaths; and
WHEREAS, the California Governor on March 4, 2020 proclaimed a State of Emergency
to exist in California due to the COVID-19 pandemic; and
WHEREAS, the President of the United States on March 13, 2020 declared the outbreak
of COVID-19 in the United States constituted a national emergency; and
WHEREAS, On March 13, 2020, the San Luis Obispo County Emergency Services
Director issued a Proclamation of Local Emergency due to the spread of COVID-19 in the County
of San Luis Obispo; and
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2020, the Morro Bay City Manager proclaimed a declaration of
the existence of a local emergency within the City of Morro Bay due to the threat posed to. the
City from COVID-19, and that declaration was subsequently ratified by the City Council on March
19, 2020; and
WHEREAS, because of these emergency conditions due to the continuing COVID-19
pandemic, many people are experiencing or will experience substantial loss of income as a result
of business closures, the loss of hours or wages, or layoffs related to COVID-19, hindering their
ability to keep up with rent or mortgage payments, leaving them potentially vulnerable to eviction
o r foreclosure; and
WHEREAS, at the same time, consumers while seeking to purchase medical and
e mergency supplies, as well as food and consumer goods, may face unscrupulous price gouging
o r profiteering, during the COVID-19 pandemic emergency conditions and
WHEREAS in response to the prospect of evictions, foreclosures, and price gouging
during the COVID-19 emergency, various government authorities have issued emergency orders
and regulations; and
01181.0001/641330.4
WHEREAS, Executive Order N-37-20 issued by the Governor on March 27, 2020 prohibits
the enforcement of residential eviction orders for renters affected by the COVID-19 pandemic
through May 31, 2020, and that order also provides that a renter must inform the landlord in
writing, within seven days of the rent being due, of delays caused by specified COVID-19 reasons;
and
WHEREAS, On April 6, 2020, the California Judicial Council issued Emergency Rule No.
1 which provides for a suspension of the issuance of summons, and the entry of defaults, in
unlawful detainer actions (i e., an eviction), unless the court finds there is a health and safety
reason (e g , a health hazard), meaning that said Judicial Council rule effectively suspends new
evictions (other than for health and safety reasons) until 90 days after the California State of
Emergency concerning COVID-19 is lifted, or as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Governor secured agreement on March 25, 2020 from many major
financial institutions to provide mortgage payment forbearances of up to 90 days to borrowers
economically impacted by COVID-19, and mortgage holders are to contact their bank for more
information; and
WHEREAS, on April 6, 2020, the California Judicial Council issued Emergency Rule No.
2 to stay court proceedings on judicial foreclosure actions until 90 days after the California State
of Emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic is lifted, or as amended; and
WHEREAS, Penal Code § 396(b) prohibits price gouging as of the California State of
Emergency declared on March 4, 2020 by the Governor, and such price gouging (with some
exceptions) is raising the price more than 10% of the pre -emergency price; and
WHEREAS, Executive Order N-44-20 issued by the Governor on April 3, 2020 provides
that the above price gouging regulations shall be in effect through September 4, 2020 (rather than
April 4, 2020), and that order also backdates the price point from which "price gouging' is weighed
to February 4, 2020 (rather than March 4, 2020) with certain exceptions, and
WHEREAS, the Morro Bay City Council desires that residents of Morro Bay are informed
and aware of their rights under said State emergency orders and law.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY,
CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
1. Recitals The City Council hereby finds and believes that the above recitals are true and
correct and incorporate them herein by reference.
2. Emergency Orders on Evictions, Foreclosures and Price Gouging. The City Council
hereby orders that City staff publicize to City residents in as widespread a manner as is
reasonably feasible under the conditions prevailing during this local emergency the following
COVID-19 emergency orders, rules and regulations:
A. Eviction Relief / Eviction Moratorium - Executive Order N-37-20 (Exhibit A) and
Judicial Council Emergency Rule No. 1 (Exhibits B)
B. Mortgage Relief / Judicial Foreclosure Moratorium — Governor's March 25, 2020
01181.0001/641330.4
Agreement with Major Financial Institutions Regarding Mortgage Payment
Forbearances (Exhibit C) and Judicial Council Emergency Rule No. 2 (Exhibits B)
C Price Gouging and Profiteering - Penal Code § 396(b) (Exhibit D) and Executive Order
N-44-20 (Exhibit E)
Effective Date of Resolution. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon
passage and adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.
4. Publication. This Resolution and its contents will be published and promulgated in as
widespread a manner as is reasonably feasible under the conditions prevailing during this
local emergency.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay,
California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 14th day of April 2020 by the following vote:
AYES. Headding, Addis, Davis, Heller, McPherson
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
JOHN = DI G Mayor
ATTEST:
NA SWANSON, City NA Clerk
01181.0001/641330.4
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
EXECUTIVE ORDER N-37-20
WHEREAS on March 4, 2020, I proclaimed a State of Emergency to exist in
California as a result of the threat of COVID-19; and
WHEREAS in a short period of time, COVID-19 has rapidly spread
throughout California, necessitating stringent public health emergency orders as
well as guidance from federal state, and local public health officials; and
WHEREAS on March 16, 2020, I issued Executive Order N-28-20, suspending
state law limitations on local jurisdictions that impose restrictions on evictions;
and
WHEREAS on March 19, 2020, I issued Executive Order N-33-20, ordering all
residents to immediately heed the Order of the State Public Health Officer for all
residents, unless exempted, to stay home or at their place of residence; and
WHEREAS many Californians are experiencing or will experience
substantial losses of income as a result of business closures, the loss of hours or
wages, or layoffs related to COVID-19, hindering their ability to keep up with
their rent, and leaving them vulnerable to eviction; and
WHEREAS minimizing evictions during this period is critical to reducing the
spread of COVID-19 in vulnerable populations by allowing all residents to stay
home or at their place of residence in compliance with Executive Order N-33-20;
and
WHEREAS Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye issued advisory guidance on
March 20, 2020 for superior courts to suspend most civil trials and hearings for at
least 60 days and on March 23, 2020, suspended all jury trials for a period of 60
days, and extended by 60 days the time period for the holding of a civil trial;
and
WHEREAS on March 25, 2020 the Department of Business Oversight
secured support from national banks, state banks and credit unions for
temporary delays in mortgage payments and foreclosure sales and evictions for
homeowners who have economic impacts from COVID-19 with the objective of
maximizing consistency and minimizing hurdles potentially faced by borrowers.
NOW, THEREFORE, 1, GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor of the State of California,
in accordance with the authority vested in me by the State Constitution and
statutes of the State of California, and in particular Government Code sections
8567 and 8571, do hereby issue the following Order to become effective
immediately:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1) The deadline specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 1 167 shall be
extended for a period of 60 days for any tenant who is served, while
1.1
1
this Order is in effect, with a complaint that seeks to evict the tenant
from a residence or dwelling unit for nonpayment of rent and who
satisfies all of the following requirements:
a. Prior to the date of this Order, the tenant paid rent due to the
landlord pursuant to an agreement.
b. The tenant notifies the landlord in writing before the rent is due,
or within a reasonable period of time afterwards not to exceed 7
days, that the tenant needs to delay all or some payment of rent
because of an inability to pay the full amount due to reasons
related to COVID-19, including but not limited to the following:
(i) The tenant was unavailable to work because the tenant
was sick with a suspected or confirmed case of COVID-19
or caring for a household or family member who was sick
with a suspected or confirmed case of COVID-19;
(ii) The tenant experienced a lay-off, loss of hours, or other
income reduction resulting from COVID-19, the state of
emergency, or related government response; or
(iii) The tenant needed to miss work to care for a child whose
school was closed in response to COVID-19.
c. The tenant retains verifiable documentation, such as termination
notices, payroll checks, pay stubs, bank statements, medical
bills, or signed letters or statements from an employer or
supervisor explaining the tenant's changed financial
circumstances, to support the tenant's assertion of an inability to
pay. This documentation may be provided to the landlord no
later than the time upon payment of back -due rent.
2) No writ may be enforced while this Order is in effect to evict a tenant
from a residence or dwelling unit for nonpayment of rent who satisfies
the requirements of subparagraphs (a)-(c) of paragraph 1.
3) The protections in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be in effect through May
31, 2020.
Nothing in this Order shall prevent a tenant who is able to pay all or some
of the rent due from paying that rent in a timely manner or relieve a tenant of
liability for unpaid rent.
Nothing in this Order shall in any way restrict state or local governmental
authority to order any quarantine, isolation, or other public health measure that
may compel an individual to remain physically present in a particular residential
property.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order supersedes Executive Order N-28-20
to the extent that there is any conflict with that Order.
This Order is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits,
substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity, against the State of
California, its agencies, departments, entities, officers, employees, or any other
person.
teal*Inti
FURTHER DIRECT that as soon as hereafter possible, this proclamation be
filed in the Office of the Secretary of State and that widespread publicity and
notice be given of this Order.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set
my hand and caused the Great Seal of the
State of California to be affixed this 27th
day of March 2020.
GAVIN NEWSOM
Governor of California
ATTEST:
ALEX PADILLA
Secretary of State
JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIA
455 Golden Gate Avenue • San Francisco, California 94102-3688
www.courts.ca.gov
REPORT TO THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL
Item No.: 20-141
For business meeting on: April 6, 2020
Title
Judicial Branch Administration j Emergency
Rules in Response to the COVID-19
Pandemic
Rules, Forms, Standards, or Statutes Affected
Adopt Cal. Rules of Court, emergency rules
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11
Recommended by
Hon. Marsha G. Slough, Chair, Executive
and Planning Committee
Hon. David M. Rubin, Chair, Judicial Branch
Budget Committee and Litigation
Management Committee
Hon Kyle S. Brodie, Chair, Technology
Committee
Hon Marla 0 Anderson, Chair, Legislation
Committee
Hon. Harry E Hull, Jr., Chair, Rules
Committee
Agenda Item Type
Action Required
Effective Date
April 6, 2020
Date of Report
April 4, 2020
Executive Summary
Due to the immediate and ongoing impact the COVID-19 pandemic is having on California's
judicial branch, and at the request of Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye, Chair of the Judicial
Council, the chairs of the Judicial Council's six internal committees recommend that the Judicial
Council adopt rules of court to: suspend the entry of defaults in unlawful detainer actions'
suspend judicial foreclosures; provide for remote appearance via technology; adopt a statewide
emergency bail schedule that sets bail at $0 for most misdemeanor and lower -level felony
offenses; provide for personal appearance through counsel for defendants in pretrial criminal
proceedings; prioritize for juvenile dependency and juvenile delinquency proceedings various
hearing and orders and set a structure for remote hearings and continuances; extend the
timeframes for specified temporary restraining orders; and adopt miscellaneous civil proposals,
including suspending the statutes of limitations governing civil actions. The Judicial Council
should take these temporary actions in order to protect the health and safety of the public, court
employees, attorneys, litigants, and judicial officers, as well as staff and inmates in detention
facilities, and law enforcement during the state of emergency related to the COVID-19
pandemic.
On March 20, 2020 Governor Newsom issued a statewide shelter in place order' with limited
exceptions for emergency services. Adults over the age of 65 and persons of any age who have
serious underlying medical conditions are at higher risk and required to stay home. In addition,
several counties have issued local shelter in place orders that are more restrictive than the
statewide order issued by the Governor. Courts are currently operating with greatly reduced
numbers of staff and judicial officers. The courts' workforce continues to diminish weekly as
staff and judicial officers are overtaxed and risking their health. As a result, the courts must
responsibly, carefully, stringently and strategically determine which urgent court services take
priority. Thus far, the efforts of the judicial branch have been to balance the access to justice for
critical and vulnerable populations of people, while ensuring the health and safety of the public
we serve and those in the courts. During this time, it is critical to balance the demands on the
courts and concerns for the public, including the need to extend time to permit the courts to
establish remote technology for those who wish to use it.
Recommendation
The chairs of the Judicial Council's six internal committees recommend that the Judicial Council
adopt the following rules of court, to take effect immediately:
Unlawful Detainers and Foreclosures: Proposed Emergency Rules 1-2
1. Adopt emergency rule 1 to suspend the issuance of summons and entry of default and default
judgments on unlawful detainer complaints, and to allow courts to set trials on any unlawful
detainer actions in which a defendant has appeared more than 60 days after the request for
such a trial, unless the court finds that earlier action is needed to protect public health and
safety.
2. Adopt emergency rule 2 to stay all actions for judicial foreclosures on mortgages and deeds
of trust and extend all deadlines related to such actions.
Use of Technology to Conduct Proceedings Remotely: Proposed Emergency Rule 3
1 Executive Order N-33-20: https://covid19.ca.gov/iing/Exectitive-Order-N-33-20.pcif
2
3. Adopt emergency rule 3 to provide that courts may require that judicial proceedings and
court operations be conducted remotely; however, in criminal proceedings, courts must
receive the consent of the defendant to conduct the proceeding remotely Conducting
proceedings remotely includes, but is not limited to the use of video, audio, and telephonic
means for remote appearances; the electronic exchange and authentication of documentary
evidence; e-filing and e-service; and the use of remote interpreting, remote reporting, and
electronic recording to make the official record of an action or proceeding.
Criminal Proceedings: Proposed Emergency Rules 4-5
4. Adopt emergency rule 4 establishing a statewide Fmergency Bail Schedule that sets bail at
$0 for most misdemeanor and lower -level felony offenses and includes other specified
provisions.
5. Adopt emergency rule 5 to provide for appearance through counsel and remote appearance
via technology for defendants in pretrial criminal proceedings.
Juvenile Dependency and Juvenile Delinquency Proceedings: Proposed Emergency Rules 6-7
6. Adopt emergency rule 6 for juvenile dependency proceedings that would prioritize specified
hearings and orders and set a structure for remote hearings and continuances.
7. Adopt emergency rule 7 related to juvenile delinquency that would prioritize hearings and
orders in juvenile delinquency proceedings and set a structure for remote hearings and
continuances Emergency rule 7 would also grant an extension of time under Welfare and
Institutions Code section 709.
Temporary Restraining Orders: Proposed Emergency Rule 8
8. Adopt emergency rule 8 related to temporary restraining orders that, among other changes,
would extend the timeframes for specified orders and allow courts to transmit an order in any
fon nat to the entering agency for transmission into the California Department of Justice
database.2
Civil Proceedings: Proposed Emergency Rules 9-11
9. Adopt emergency rule 9 to toll the statutes of limitation for all civil causes of action from
April 6, 2020, to 90 days after the state of emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic is
lifted.
10. Adopt emergency rule 10 to increase by six months, for all civil actions filed on or before
April 6, 2020, the five years in which to bring the actions to trial under Code of Civil
2 Family Code section 6380 requires that protective orders be entered into the California Restraining and Protective
Order System (CARPOS) maintained by the Department of Justice.
3
Procedure section 583.310 and the three years in which to bring a new trial of the actions
under Code of Civil Procedure section 583.320.
11. Adopt emergency rule 11 to allow a party or nonparty deponent, at their election or the
election of the deposing party, to appear at a deposition remotely through electronic means.
Relevant Previous Council Action
This is the second action taken by the Judicial Council to address the impact of the COVID-19
pandemic as it affects California's residents and judicial branch.
• On March 28, 20203, the Judicial Council met in an emergency session and approved
recommendations authorizing and supporting the Chief Justice to, among other actions,
issue statewide orders to extend certain statutory deadlines until 90 days after the state of
emergency related to COVID-19 is lifted. Those orders include the following:
• Extending the 10-day court period provided in Penal Code section 859b for the holding of
a preliminary examination and the defendant's right of release to 30 court days;
• Extending the time period provided in Penal Code section 825 within which a defendant
charged with a felony offense shall be taken before a magistrate from 48 hours to not
more than 7 days;
• Extending the time period provided in Penal Code section 1382 for the holding of a
criminal trial by no more than 30 days; and
• Extending the time periods provided in Code of Civil Procedure sections 583.310 and
583.320 to bring an action to trial by no more than 30 days.
The Judicial Council also directed the superior courts to:
• Make use of available technology, when possible, to conduct judicial proceedings and
court operations remotely in order to protect the health and safety of the public, court
personnel, judicial officers, litigants, and witnesses. This includes the use of video, audio,
and telephonic means for remote appearances, reporting, and interpreting in judicial
proceedings; the electronic exchange and authentication of documentary evidence; and
the use of e-filing and e-service; and
• For criminal and juvenile proceedings, including arraignments and preliminary
examinations, prioritize the use of available technology to meet current statutory time
requirements and ensure that defendants are not held in custody, and children are not held
3 Judicial Council of Cal., Judicial Branch Administration: Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic (Mar. 27. 2020),
1lttps: //jcc. legistar. cone/LegislationDetail. aspx ?ID=4408176&G UID=C64F8BB5-2C51-46DC-90FA-
A 51 F1 C56BF94.
4
in custody or removed from the custody of their parents or guardians, without timely due
process of law or in violation of constitutional rights.
The Chief Justice issued a statewide order4 on March 30 implementing the temporary emergency
measures approved by the Judicial Council. The Chief Justice has also issued two advisories'
and one other statewide order,6 as well as approximately 100 individual emergency orders at the
request of courts.'
Analysis/Rationale
Background
The United States continues to be the epicenter of the global pandemic caused by the COVID-19
virus. As of April 3, 2020, it was reported that there have been more than one million confirmed
cases of COVID-19 in the world and more than 54,000 deaths.
On March 4, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom proclaimed a state of emergency in California as a
result of the threat of COVID-19. 8 Despite sustained efforts by all levels of government,
COVID-19 continues to spread rapidly and is impacting nearly all sectors of California.
As of this writing, the Governor's COVID-19 website reported that in California there are more
than 10,000 positive cases and there have been 237 deaths. A surge of COVID-19 cases is
expected in the next two weeks, and the Governor predicts that the state needs another 50,000
hospital beds to accommodate new cases. Californians have been directed to stay at home to
slow the spread of the virus and to practice social distancing. Nearly all venues with public
gatherings have been closed, including state parks and beaches.
The continuous operation of our courts to provide due process and protect the public is essential
for our constitutional form of government; however, courts are clearly high -risk places during
this pandemic because they require gatherings of judicial officers, court staff, litigants, attorneys,
witnesses, defendants, law enforcement, and juries in numbers well in excess of what is allowed
for gathering under current executive and health orders. Indeed, many court facilities in
California are ill-equipped to implement social distancing and satisfy other public health
4 March 30 statewide order: https://newsroom. courts.ca.gov/news/chief-justice-issues-order-implementing-
temporary-court-emergencv-measures.
5 The two advisories may found at: https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/california-chief-justice-issues-guidance-to-
expedite-court-emergency-orders, and hops://newsroonr.courts.ca.gov/news/california-chief-justice-issues-second-
advisor y-orl-emergency-relief-measures.
6 March 23 statewide order: https://newsroom. cour•ts.ca.gov/news/chief-justice-issues-stateivide-order-suspending-
jur1'-trials.
7 Copies of the emergency orders may found at: https: //newsroom. courts. ca.gov/news/court-emergencv-orders-
6794321.
8 State of emergency proclamation: https://www.gov.ca.gov/1vp-content/uploads/2020/03/3.4.20-Coronavirus-SOE-
Proclaination.pdf.
5
requirements necessary to protect people involved in court proceedings and prevent the further
spread of COVID-19.
Every state and territory in the country has now delayed jury trials. New York State Unified
Court System has implemented temporary "virtual court" operations in New York City Criminal
and Family Courts to reduce courtroom density and stem the spread of COVID-19. However,
courts must provide due process for defendants who are currently in custody and are entitled to
timely pretrial appearances.
On March 16, the California legislature voted unanimously to recess from March 20 to April 13
in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. On April 3, the legislature extended their recess to May
4.
On March 24, the Governor issued an order to suspend the intake of all incarcerated persons into
adult state prisons and Division of Juvenile Justice facilities at the county level for a minimum of
30 days, which will impact county jail and juvenile detention facility populations.9 The spread of
the virus has hit California's inmate population as well as staff members in the prison system.
Many inmates have ongoing court cases and courts cannot be assured that safe social distancing
can be maintained with the transport of in -custody defendants and the holding cells adjacent to or
within courthouses.
On March 25, the California Governor announced an agreement with multiple financial
institutions allowing Californians economically impacted by the COVED-19 pandemic to receive
90-day grace periods to make mortgage payments and for at least 60 days, the financial
institutions will not initiate foreclosure sales or evictions.1 o
On March 27, the Governor issued an executive order banning the enforcement of eviction
orders for renters affected by the COVED-19 pandemic through May 31, 2020.11 This was in
addition to his previous order on March 16 authorizing local governments to halt evictions for
renters impacted by the pandemic. 12
The Governor, also on March 27, issued an order related to the emergency authority of the Chief
Justice and the Judicial Council.13 Among other items, the order states:
In the event that the Judicial Council or its Chairperson, in the exercise of rulemaking
authority consistent with Paragraph 2, wishes to consider a rule that would otherwise be
9 Executive Order N-36-20: www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/3.24.20-EO-N-36-20.pdf.
10 Governor's financial relief package: www.gov.ca.gov/2020/03/25/governor•-gavin-newsom-announces-major-
financial-relief-package-90-dav-mortgage payment-relief-during-covid-19-crisis/.
11 Executive Order N-37-20: ww%t1.gov.ca.gov/►vp-content/iiploads/2020/03/3.27.20-EO-N-37-20.pdj:
12 Executive Order N-28-20: www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/3.16.20-Executive-Order.pdf
13 Executive Order N-38-20: w'vnt'.gov.ca.gov/itp-content/uploads/2020/03/3.27.20-N-38-20.pdf.
6
inconsistent with any statute concerning civil or criminal practice or procedure, the
relevant statute is suspended, subject to the following conditions:
a. The statute is suspended only to the extent it is inconsistent with the proposed
rule;
b. The statute is suspended only if the proposed rule is adopted; and
c. The statute is suspended only when the adopted rule becomes effective.
Unlawful detainers and foreclosures proposed emergency rules 1-2
At a time when people are being urged to stay at home to protect public health and safety,
unlawful detainers are particularly problematic for two reasons' (1) they require very fast legal
responses (within five days) from defendants who are often self -represented and at a time when
court self-help centers and legal aid services are not readily available; (2) when involving
residential property, they threaten to remove people from the very homes they have been
instructed to remain in In addition, the number of such actions for both commercial and
residential properties is likely to explode in coming months as a significant portion of the
population faces severe economic losses due to the closing of businesses loss of income, and
inability to work due to illness or the need for childcare in light of stay-at-home orders —
resulting in a surge of unlawful detainer filings and trials in the courts
The Governor's executive order is intended to help address this crisis by providing an extended
answer period to, and banning the enforcement of evictions for, residential tenants who have
suffered COVID-19 pandemic —related income loss and meet certain other requirements. That
order, however cannot by itself provide sufficient assistance to tenants and courts to avert this
crisis. Proposed emergency rule 1 would amend current court procedures throughout the
pandemic to implement the goals of the executive order as well as protect litigants and court
staff.
Proposed rule emergency rule 1 would preclude a court from issuing summonses on unlawful
detainer complaints. Currently, the summons that must be issued on the filing of an unlawful
detainer complaint instructs the defendant that a faunal response must be made within five
days —instructions that do not apply to those tenants who meet the conditions of the executive
order and which, if defendants do follow them, will deprive the defendants of the rights provided
in that order and force them to move forward in a fast -paced proceeding with little or no help
available. (Because it is not possible to tell from the face of the complaint whether a tenant might
be eligible for the extended answer period and protection from enforcement, it is not feasible to
limit issuance of summonses to only certain cases.)
The economic hardships brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic mean that many homeowners
will have difficulty making mortgage payments for the same reasons that tenants will have
difficulties making rent payments. The Federal Housing Finance Agency has directed certain
federal lenders to suspend foreclosures during this crisis, but there are many millions of home
mortgages still subject to foreclosure. Although most foreclosures in California take place
7
without any court action, lenders may choose to file complaints for foreclosure and deficiency
judgments with the courts, resulting in evictions of residents at a time when they are most in
need of shelter and may find it difficult to afford legal defense. Such proceedings will also
impact court staff.
Proposed emergency rule 2 would stay court proceedings on judicial foreclosure actions until 90
days after the state of emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic is lifted, toll the statute of
limitations for filing such actions for that same period, and continue the deadlines for exercising
any claims of redemption on foreclosure sales.
Use of technology to conduct proceedings remotely: proposed emergency rule 3
On March 28, the Judicial Council directed superior courts to make use of available technology,
when possible, to conduct judicial proceedings and court operations remotely, in order to protect
the health and safety of the public, court personnel, judicial officers, litigants, and witnesses. On
March 3014, the Chief Justice issued an order suspending any rule in the California Rules of
Court to the extent such rule would prevent a court from using technology to conduct judicial
proceedings and court operations remotely, consistent with Governor Newsom's Fxecutive
Order N-38-20, which also provides for the suspension of related statutes that impose limitations
on the subject of these emergency orders.
This recommendation is intended to confirm and clarify those previous actions, and to support
courts in conducting essential court functions, including arraignments, preliminary hearings,
restraining orders, juvenile proceedings, and mental health hearings, while at the same time
implementing the social -distancing measures necessary to limit the spread of COVID-19.
This proposal recommends that the council adopt a rule that would suspend any rule in the
California Rules of Court and any statute to the extent that the rules and statutes are inconsistent
with or limit a court's ability to require that judicial proceedings and court operations be
conducted remotely. Specifically, the proposed rule provides that courts may require that judicial
proceedings and court operations be conducted remotely; however, in criminal proceedings,
courts must receive the consent of the defendant to conduct the proceeding remotely and
otherwise comply with proposed emergency rule 5. The proposed rule is intended to provide
courts with broad authority to use technology to conduct proceedings remotely, including using
video, audio, and telephonic means for remote appearances; requiring the electronic exchange
and authentication of documentary evidence; requiring e-filing and e-service; and using remote
interpreting, remote reporting, and electronic recording to make the official record of an action or
proceeding.
14 March 30 statewide order, supra, note 4.
8
Criminal proceedings: proposed emergency rules 4-5
Statewide Emergency Bail Schedule
During the COVID-19 pandemic, trial courts have a vital role to play in balancing public safety
and public health by assisting to safely reduce jail populations in a manner that protects the
health of inmates, jail staff, those who transport defendants to courts, and others as individuals
leave jail and return to their communities. The courts can assist by peunitting more persons
accused of misdemeanors and other lower -level offenses to be released from jail custody prior to
arraignment, which in turn will reduce the immediate burden on the courts to conduct
arraignments and preliminary examinations within compact timeframes.
After arrest, an accused person held in jail prior to arraignment must be brought before a
magistrate for arraignment within 48 hours (a timeframe that has been extended to seven days
under the Chief Justice's order of March 30). Alternatively, if the person has bailed out of
custody, there is no specified timeframe within which the arraignment must occur. Whether an
accused is in or out of custody a preliminary hearing must occur within 10 court days after
arraignment (a timeframe that has been extended to 30 days under the Chief Justice s order of
March 30). If more individuals can bail out of custody, arraignments can be delayed and
calendared to a later date, reducing the burden on courts to hold large numbers of arraignments
and preliminary examinations within a short timeframe, especially at a time when many
courtrooms are closed, and staff is limited.
On March 20, the Chief Justice issued an advisory that recommended the following:
Revise, on an emergency basis the countywide bail schedule to lower bail amounts
significantly for the duration of the coronavirus emergency, including lowering the bail
amount to $0 for many lower level offenses — for all misdemeanors except for those listed
in Penal Code section 1270.1 and for lower -level felonies
Following this advisory, some courts adopted emergency bail schedules, but during this time
there is a need for greater uniformity throughout the state.
This proposal is for the Judicial Council to adopt an emergency rule of court that provides for a
statewide Fmergency Bail Schedule. Proposed emergency rule 4 would require:
• The Emergency Bail Schedule to set bail at $0 for misdemeanors and certain felonies,
with exceptions for serious felonies under Penal Code section 1192.7(c) and violent
felonies under Penal Code sections 667 5(c), and other offenses such as those involving
domestic violence or stalking, driving under the influence offenses, and offenses
requiring sex offender registration.
• Pursuant to Penal Code section 1269b, the application of the statewide Emergency Bail
Schedule to any accused currently held in county jail custody charged with an offense
9
covered by the schedule. The rule would provide that each superior court's current bail
schedule would remain in effect for all offenses other than those addressed in the
Fmeigency Bail Schedule and provide courts with authority to revise those remaining
portions of their schedules, including setting bail for court -specific conduct
enhancements and any status enhancements.
• Bail to be set at $0 for violations of misdemeanoi probation, whether the arrest is made
with or without a bench warrant. For violations of felony probation, parole, post release
community supervision, or mandatory supervision, bail must be set in the same amount
as bail for the underlying substantive charge of conviction under the Emergency Bail
Schedule.
• No later than 5 p.m. on April 10, 2020, requires courts to apply the statewide Fmergency
Bail Schedule to every accused person arrested and in pretrial custody and to every
person held in pretrial jail custody.
• This rule will remain in effect until 90 days after the Governor declares that the state of
emergency arising from the COVID-19 pandemic is lifted, or until amended or repealed
by the Judicial Council.
Remote Appearance via Technology and Appearance through Counsel for Defendants in
Pretrial Criminal Proceedings
Article I, section 15 of the California Constitution provides in part, "The defendant in a criminal
cause has the right to a speedy public trial, to compel attendance of witnesses in the defendant's
behalf, to have the assistance of counsel for the defendant's defense, to be personally present
with counsel, and to be confronted with the witnesses against the defendant." Consistent with the
Constitution, Penal Code section 977 provides the accused with options regarding personal
appearance, appearance through counsel, and appearances via technology for arraignment, plea,
sentencing, and other phases of criminal proceedings, requires the defendant's presence under
specified circumstances, and provides certain protections.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, trial courts must protect defendants' constitutional rights to
have the assistance of counsel and to be personally present with counsel, and at the same time
take steps to protect the health of defendants, judicial officers, court staff, counsel, and all those
who are required to be present in court. This proposed rule of court, together with other
protective efforts, enables courts to strike that balance.
Under the proposed rule, courts must, with the knowing and voluntary consent of the defendant,
permit the defendant to appeal through counsel at all pretrial portions of a criminal proceeding.
Additionally or alternatively and to the greatest extent possible, courts must provide for the
remote appearance of defendants via audio/visual electronic communication or other technology.
The technology must provide for private communications between the defendant and the
attorney. The rule requires courts to accept defendants' waivers of appearance through oral
representation of counsel or electronic communication by the defendant.
10
Juvenile dependency proceedings: proposed emergency rules 6-7
During the state of emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic, critical juvenile dependency
proceedings also called child welfare proceedings, need to occur to ensure that a child is safe
from child abuse and neglect. Judicial oversight is needed to ensure the safety, permanency, and
well-being of children and youth who have been removed from their homes and placed into
foster care or who may need to be removed from their homes Prolonged or indefinite delays in
delivering services and postponements of judicial oversight place children's safety and well-
being in jeopardy, may lead to unnecessarily long stays in foster care, and are inconsistent with
statutory and regulatory requirements. To ensure that courts can provide the critical oversight
that is necessary to protect children and families during the state of emergency related to the
pandemic, it is recommended that the council adopt an emergency rule of court for juvenile
dependency proceedings to take effect immediately that would:
• Prioritize hearings and orders that need to be made in juvenile dependency proceedings
These include hearing detentions, psychotropic medication requests, emergency medical
requests, temporary restraining orders, reentry petitions for nonminor dependents, and
section 388 petitions that require immediate relief based on the state of emergency related
to the pandemic
• Provide a structure for remote hearings and continuances of hearings during the state of
emergency related to the pandemic. Hearing requirements include provisions for remote
appearances, service of notice, court reports, deter iinations of required findings and
orders including the need for continuances in certain circumstances, and visitation orders.
Juvenile delinquency proceedings: During the state of emergency related to the COVID-19
pandemic, critical juvenile delinquency proceedings need to occur in order to protect the
community and provide for the rehabilitation of the child. Delays in these hearings can cause
prolonged and unnecessary detention in juvenile detention facilities that negatively impact the
well-being of the child. While there are many parallels between juvenile delinquency and
criminal proceedings, there are key differences including confidential proceedings and records,
no access to juries, and opportunities to seal records, all of which are rooted in the objective of
rehabilitating the child during a key period of development. To ensure that courts can provide the
critical oversight and judicial determinations that are necessary to protect the community and
provide services to the child during the state of emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic, it
is recommended that an emergency rule be adopted to take effect immediately that would:
• Prioritize hearings and orders that need to be made in juvenile delinquency proceedings.
These include hearing detentions and other hearings for in -custody children psychotropic
medication requests, emergency medical requests, temporary restraining orders, reentry
petitions for nonminor dependents, any request for a warrant for a child, probable -cause
determinations, proceedings for children who are not detained, and hearings for children
in foster care.
11
• Provide a structure for remote hearings and continuances of hearings during the state of
emergency related to the pandemic. Hearing requirements include provisions for remote
appearances, service of notice, and introduction of evidence
• Grant an extension of time for requirements under Welfare and Institutions Code section
709 concerning a child who is not competent for juvenile adjudication
Temporary restraining orders: proposed emergency rule 8
In times of crisis, many individuals, including victims of domestic violence, are more vulnerable
as access to the court and social services become more limited. It is imperative that our courts
continue to be open to Californians who seek restraining orders to stop abuse, harassment, or
other harm. During this crisis, courts are also significantly impacted and are limiting operations
to piotect the public, court staff, and judicial officers. To ensure that litigants throughout
California have access to court services statewide, and to ensure that individuals needing
protection have valid and enforceable orders during court closures, it is recommended that the
council adopt an emergency rule of court to take effect immediately that would do the following:
Provide that emergency protective orders issued pursuant to Family Code section
6250 be granted for up to 30 days;
2. Allow courts to issue temporary restraining orders and gun violence emergency
protective orders for up to 90 days, to allow the matter to be heard by the court;
3. Allow courts to automatically extend any criminal protective order that is set to
expire during state of emergency related to the COV11)-19 pandemic period, for up to
90 days, to allow the matter to be heard by the court;
4. Require courts to provide a means for the filing of ex parte requests for any
temporary restraining order. Courts may do so by providing a physical location, drop
box or, if feasible, through electronic means;
5. Allow e-signatures for restraining order requests;
6. If the proposed restrained party appears remotely, not require further service on the
restrained party for enforcement purposes provided that the court follows the
requirements of Family Code section 6384; and
7. When extending a temporary restraining order, if completing the mandatory Judicial
Council forms is impractical, allow courts to transmit an order in any format to the
entering agency for transmission into the California Department of Justice database. is
15 Family Code section 6380 requires that protective orders be entered into CARPOS.
12
Civil proceedings: proposed emergency rules 9-11
The COVID-19 pandemic is having a severe impact on the lives and well-being of all
Californians. The human crisis, in turn, has disrupted and delayed the operations of superior
courts across the state. Given Constitutional imperatives, the superior courts have had to shift
their resources to address the most urgent criminal actions and proceedings affecting the most
vulnerable. The disruption to court operations will have long-term repercussions on the workload
of the superior courts and civil trials of less urgent matters are likely to be the last to be resolved
in the courts' increasing backlog.
To protect the rights of litigants in civil proceedings and to address the long-teiiu backlog of civil
actions, the chairs of the internal committees recommend the following rule proposals:
Toll the running of statutes of limitation for civil causes of action
Proposed emergency rule 9 tolls the statutes of limitation for civil causes of action. Tolling stops
or suspends the running of time in statutes of limitations; when the tolling period ends (90 days
from the end of the state of emergency), the time to bring an action will begin to run again. This
rule is necessary to allow parties and attorneys time to investigate, gather information and
evidence, and detenmme whether to file an action During the pendency of the state of
emergency, the ability to do so is restricted. Proposed emergency rule 9 would, for all civil
causes of action, toll the statutes of limitation from April 6, 2020, to 90 days after the Governor
lifts the state of emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Extend the time in which to bring civil actions to trial
Proposed emergency rule 10 provides a six-month extension of the statutory limits on the time to
bring a civil action to trial.
• Proposed rule 10(a) would, for all civil actions filed before April 6, 2020, increase by six
months the time in which the actions would otherwise have to have been brought to trial
in Code of Civil Procedure section 583.310 (for a total of five years and six months).
• Proposed rule 10(b) would, for all actions filed before April 6, 2020 if a new trial is
granted in the action, increase by six months to three years within which the action would
otherwise have to again be brought to trial in Code of Civil Procedure section 583.320
(for a total of three years and six months). Proposed subdivision (b) explicitly confirms
that nothing in the subdivision requires that an action again be brought to trial before
expiration of the time prescribed in subdivision (a) of the rule.
Remote Depositions
Proposed emergency rule 11 allows for the use of remote depositions Under current law, a party
deponent is required to attend a deposition in person, and a nonparty deponent may appear
remotely only with the permission of the court upon a finding of good cause. (Code Civ. Proc., §
2025 310(b); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1010(c) and (d).) At a time when people are being
urged, if not required, to stay at home to protect public health and safety, and when courts are
already struggling to address the most urgent matters, the chairs of the internal committees
13
recommend that litigants in civil proceedings be given broader authority to allow a deponent to
appear at a deposition through electronic means, and without seeking approval of the court.
Under proposed emergency rule 11, a party or nonparty deponent, at their election or the election
of the deposing party, is not required to be present with the deposition officer at the time of the
deposition.
Policy implications
The COVID-19 pandemic presents an unprecedented crisis that threatens the lives, health and
safety of all Californians. California courts, however, provide critical services that also affect the
lives of many Californians, including some of the most vulnerable. Given the length of time the
pandemic may impact the state, the courts cannot delay all proceedings indefinitely and must
find a way to continue to provide the most critical services.
Comments
This proposal has not been circulated for comment due to the incredible speed with which the
COVID-19 pandemic has spread and the urgent need to provide courts with the tools required to
keep providing necessary services while also protecting the health and safety of the public and
those who interact with the courts
Alternatives considered
The council could take no action Over the past month however individual courts have been
struggling to address the impact of COVID-19. Given the severity of the crisis, the chairs of the
Judicial Council s six internal committees concluded that these recommendations were necessary
to help give courts the tools they need to confront the impact of the pandemic
Fiscal and Operational Impacts
It is anticipated that the proposal will facilitate court operations allowing courts to continue
critical functions while protecting the health and safety of all who would be attending court in
person, by effecting compliance with social -distancing mandates. It is uncertain what fiscal
impact these recommendations may have on the courts.
Attachments and Links
1. Cal. Rules of Court, Appendix, emergency rules 1-11, at pages 15-29
14
Emergency Rules 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 of the California Rules of Court are
adopted effective April 6, 2020, to read:
1
2 Emergency rule 1. Unlawful detainers
3
4 Application
5
6 Notwithstanding any other law, including Code of Civil Procedure sections 1166,
7 1167, 1169, and 1170.5, this rule applies to all actions for unlawful detainer.
8
9 Issuance of summons
10
11 A court may not issue a summons on a complaint for unlawful detainer unless the
12 court finds, in its discretion and on the record, that the action is necessary to protect
13 public health and safety.
14
15 Entry of default
16
17 A court may not enter a default or a default judgment for restitution in an unlawful
18 detainer action for failure of defendant to appear unless the court finds both of the
19 following:
20
21 (1) The action is necessary to protect public health and safety; and
22
23 (2) The defendant has not appeared in the action within the time provided by
24 law, including by any applicable executive order.
25
26 fill Time for trial
27
28 If a defendant has appeared in the action, the court may not set a trial date earlier
29 than 60 days after a request for trial is made unless the court finds that an earlier
30 trial date is necessary to protect public health and safety Any trial set in an
31 unlawful detainer proceeding as of April 1, 2020 must be continued at least 60 days
32 from the initial date of trial.
33
34 Le), Sunset of rule
35
36 This rule will remain in effect until 90 days after the Governor declares that the
37 state of emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic is lifted, or until amended or
38 repealed by the Judicial Council.
39
40
41
1 Emergency rule 2. Judicial foreclosures suspension of actions
2
3 Notwithstanding any other law, this rule applies to any action for foreclosure on a
4 mortgage or deed of trust brought under chapter 1, title 10, of part 2 of the Code of Civil
5 Procedure, beginning at section 725a, including any action for a deficiency Judgment, and
6 provides that, until 90 days after the Governor declares that the state of emergency
7 related to the COVID-19 pandemic is lifted, or until this rule is amended or repealed by
8 the Judicial Council:
9
10 (1) All such actions are stayed, and the court may take no action and issue no
11 decisions or judgments unless the court finds that action is required to further the
12 public health and safety.
13
14 (2) Any statute of limitations for filing such an action is tolled.
15
16 (3) The period for electing or exercising any rights under that chapter, including
17 exercising any right of redemption from a foreclosure sale or petitioning the court
18 in relation to such a right, is extended.
19
20
21 Emergency rule 3. Use of technology for remote appearances
22
23 Laj, Remote appearances
24
25 Notwithstanding any other law, in order to protect the health and safety of the public,
26 including court users, both in custody and out of custody defendants, witnesses, court
27 personnel, judicial officers, and others, courts must conduct judicial proceedings and
28 court operations as follows:
29
30 (1) Courts may require that Judicial proceedings and court operations be
31 conducted remotely.
32
33 (2) In criminal proceedings, courts must receive the consent of the defendant to
34 conduct the proceeding remotely and otherwise comply with emergency
35 rule 5.
36
37 (3) Conducting proceedings remotely includes, but is not limited to, the use of
38 video, audio and telephonic means for remote appearances; the electronic
39 exchange and authentication of documentary evidence; e-filing and e-service;
40 the use of remote interpreting; and the use of remote reporting and electronic
41 recording to make the official record of an action or proceeding.
42
43
16
Governor Gavin Newsom Announces Major
Financial Relief Package* 90-Day Mortgage
Payment Relief During COVID-19 Crisis
Published: Mar25, 2020
Governor Newsom announces financial institutions will provide relief for vast majority of Californians
Californians economically impacted byCOVID-19 may receive 90-day grace periods to make mortgage payments
Financial institutions agree not to negatively impact credit reports as a result of accepting payment relief
SACRAMENTO — Governor Gavin Newsom today announced that financial institutions will provide major financial relief for millions of Californians
suffering financially as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak.
"Millions of California families will be able to take a sigh of relief," said Governor Newsom. "These new financial protections will provide relief to
California families and serve as a model for the rest of the nation. I thank each of the financial institutions that will provide this relief to millions of
Californians who have been hurt financially from COVID-19."
Governor Newsom secured support from Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, U.S. Bank, and Wells Fargo and nearly 200 state -chartered banks, credit unions, and
servicers to protect homeowners and consumers.
Under the Governor's proposal, Californians who are struggling with the COVID-19 crisis may be eligible for the following relief upon contacting their
financial institution:
90-Day Grace Period for Mortgage Payments
Financial institutions will offer, consistent with applicable guidelines, mortgage payment forbearances of up to 90 days to borrowers economically
impacted by COVID-19. In addition, those institutions will:
• Provide borrowers a streamlined process to request a forbearance for COVID-19-related reasons, supported with available documentation;
• Confirm approval of and terms of forbearance program; and
• Provide borrowers the opportunity to request additional relief, as practicable, upon continued showing of hardship due to COVID-19.
No Negative Credit Impacts Resulting from Relief
Financial institutions will not report derogatory tradelines (e.g., late payments) to credit reporting agencies, consistent with applicable guidelines, for
borrowers taking advantage of COVID-19-related relief.
Moratorium on Initiating Foreclosure Sales or Evictions
For at least 60 days, financial institutions will not initiate foreclosure sales or evictions, consistent with applicable guidelines.
Relief from Fees and Charges
For at least 90 days, financial institutions will waive or refund at least the following for customers who have requested assistance:
• Mortgage -related late fees; and
• Other fees, including early CD withdrawals (subject to applicable federal regulations).
Click here for details on how to apply for relief. Loans held by a financial institution may be serviced by another company.
Please note that financial institutions and their servicers are experiencing high volumes of inquiries
1/1
§ 396. States of emergency or local emergencies; unfair..., CA PENAL § 396
West's Annotated California Codes
Penal Code (Refs & Annos)
Part 1. Of Crimes and Punishments (Refs & Annos)
Title ID. Of Crimes Against the Public Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
West's Ann.Cal.Penal Code § 396
§ 396. States of emergency or local emergencies; unfair advantage of consumers;
price controls; housing protections; penalties; definitions; preemption; calculations
Effective: January 1, 2019
Currentness
(a) The Legislature hereby finds that during a state of emergency or local emergency, including, but not limited to, an earthquake,
flood, fire riot, storm, drought, plant or animal infestation or disease, or other natural or manmade disaster, some merchants
have taken unfair advantage of consumers by greatly increasing prices for essential consumer goods and services. While the
pricing of consumer goods and services is generally best left to the marketplace under ordinary conditions, when a declared
state of emergency or local emergency results in abnormal disruptions of the market, the public interest requires that excessive
and unjustified increases in the prices of essential consumer goods and services be prohibited. It is the intent of the Legislature
in enacting this act to protect citizens from excessive and unjustified increases in the pnces charged during or shortly after a
declared state of emergency or local emergency for goods and services that are vital and necessary for the health, safety, and
welfare of consumers Further, it is the intent of the Legislature that this section be liberally construed so that its beneficial
purposes may be served.
(b) Upon the proclamation of a state of emergency declared by the President of the United States or the Governor, or upon the
declaration of a local emergency by an official, board or other governing body vested with authority to make that declaration
in any county, city, or city and county, and for a penod of 30 days following that proclamation or declaration, it is unlawful for
a person, contractor, business or other entity to sell or offer to sell any consumer food items or goods goods or services used
for emergency cleanup, emergency supplies, medical supplies, home heating oil, building materials, housing, transportation
freight, and storage services, or gasoline or other motor fuels for a price of more than 10 percent greater than the price charged
by that person for those goods or services immediately pnor to the proclamation or declaration of emergency. However, a greater
price increase is not unlawful if that person can prove that the increase in price was directly attributable to additional costs
imposed on it by the supplier of the goods, or directly attributable to additional costs for labor or materials used to provide the
services, during the state of emergency or local emergency, and the price is no more than 10 percent greater than the total of
the cost to the seller plus the markup customarily applied by the seller for that good or service in the usual course of business
immediately prior to the onset of the state of emergency or local emergency
(c) Upon the proclamation of a state of emergency declared by the President of the United States or the Governor, or upon the
declaration of a local emergency by an official, board, or other governing body vested with authority to make that declaration
in any county, city, or city and county, and for a period of 180 days following that proclamation or declaration, it is unlawful
for a contractor to sell or offer to sell any repair or reconstruction services or any services used in emergency cleanup for a
price of more than 10 percent above the price charged by that person for those services immediately prior to the proclamation
or declaration of emergency. However, a greater price increase is not unlawful if that person can prove that the increase in price
was directly attributable to additional costs imposed on it by the supplier of the goods or directly attributable to additional costs
for labor or materials used to provide the services, during the state of emergency or local emergency, and the price represents no
9 AW a 2020 'l"hornson Reuters, No claim to original U.S. Government Works.
§ 396. States of emergency or local emergencies; unfair..., CA PENAL § 396
more than 10 percent greater than the total of the cost to the contractor plus the markup customarily applied by the contractor for
that good or service in the usual course of business immediately prior to the onset of the state of emergency or local emergency.
(d) Upon the proclamation of a state of emergency declared by the President of the United States or the Governor, or upon the
declaration of a local emergency by an official, board, or other governing body vested with authority to make that declaration
in any county, city, or city and county, and for a period of 30 days following that proclamation or declaration it is unlawful
for an owner or operator of a hotel or motel to increase the hotel or motel's regular rates, as advertised immediately prior to
the proclamation or declaration of emergency, by more than 10 percent. However, a greater price increase is not unlawful if the
owner or operator can prove that the increase in price is directly attributable to additional costs imposed on it for goods or labor
used in its business, to seasonal adjustments in rates that are regularly scheduled, or to previously contracted rates.
(e) Upon the proclamation of a state of emergency declared by the President of the United States or the Governor, or upon the
declaration of a local emergency by an official, board, or other governing body vested with authority to make that declaration
in any city, county, or city and county, and for a period of 30 days following that proclamation or declaration, or any penod
the proclamation or declaration is extended by the applicable authonty, it is unlawful for any person, business, or other entity
to increase the rental price, as defined in paragraph (11) of subdivision (j), advertised, offered, or charged for housing, to an
existing or prospective tenant, by more than 10 percent. However, a greater rental price increase is not unlawful if that person can
prove that the increase is directly attributable to additional costs for repairs or additions beyond normal maintenance that were
amortized over the rental term that caused the rent to be increased greater than 10 percent or that an increase was contractually
agreed to by the tenant prior to the proclamation or declaration It shall not be a defense to a prosecution under this subdivision
that an increase in rental price was based on the length of the rental term, the inclusion of additional goods or services, except
as provided in paragraph (11) of subdivision (j) with respect to furniture, or that the rent was offered by, or paid by, an insurance
company, or other third party, on behalf of a tenant. This subdivision does not authorize a landlord to charge a price greater
than the amount authorized by a local rent control ordinance.
(f) It is unlawful for a person, business, or other entity to evict any residential tenant of residential housing after the proclamation
of a state of emergency declared by the President of the United States or the Governor, or upon the declaration of a local
emergency by an official, board, or other governing body vested with authonty to make that declaration in any city, county, or
city and county, and for a period of 30 days following that proclamation or declaration, or any period that the proclamation or
declaration is extended by the applicable authority and rent or offer to rent to another person at a rental price greater than the
evicted tenant could be charged under this section It shall not be a violation of this subdivision for a person, business, or other
entity to continue an eviction process that was lawfully begun prior to the proclamation or declaration of emergency.
(g) The prohibitions of this section may be extended for additional 30-day periods, as needed, by a local legislative body, local
official, the Governor, or the Legislature, if deemed necessary to protect the lives, property, or welfare of the citizens.
(h) A violation of this section is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for a period not exceeding one
year, or by a fine of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.
(i) A violation of this section shall constitute an unlawful business practice and an act of unfair competition within the meaning
of Section 17200 of the Business and Professions Code. The remedies and penalties provided by this section are cumulative
to each other, the remedies under Section 17200 of the Business and Professions Code and the remedies or penalties available
under all other laws of this state.
wrsT CO ?0: 0 I Thomson Rel.! ic rs. No tic roil U.S, C overnrnc:nt Worl
§ 396. States of emergency or local emergencies; unfair..., CA PENAL § 396
(i) For the purposes of this section, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1) "State of emergency" means a natural or manmade emergency resulting from an earthquake, flood, fire, riot, storm, drought,
plant or animal infestation or disease, or other natural or manmade disaster for which a state of emergency has been declared
by the President of the United States or the Governor.
(2) "Local emergency" means a natural or manmade emergency resulting from an earthquake, flood, fire, riot, storm, drought,
plant or animal infestation or disease, or other natural or manmade disaster for which a local emergency has been declared
by an official, board, or other governing body vested with authority to make that declaration in any county, city, or city and
county in California.
(3) "Consumer food item" means any article that is used or intended for use for food, drink, confection, or condiment by a
person or animal.
(4) "Repair or reconstruction services" means services performed by any person who is required to be licensed under the
Contractors' State License Law (Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions
Code), for repairs to residential or commercial property of any type that is damaged as a result of a disaster.
(5) "Emergency supplies" includes but is not limited to, water, flashlights, radios, batteries, candles, blankets, soaps, diapers,
temporary shelters, tape, toiletries, plywood, nails, and hammers.
(6) "Medical supplies" includes, but is not limited to, prescription and nonprescription medications, bandages, gauze, isopropyl
alcohol, and antibacterial products.
(7) "Building materials" means lumber, construction tools, windows, and anything else used in the building or rebuilding of
property.
(8) "Gasoline" means any fuel used to power any motor vehicle or power tool.
(9) "Transportation, freight, and storage services" means any service that is performed by any company that contracts to move,
store or transport personal or business property or that rents equipment for those purposes, including towing services
(10) "Housing" means any rental housing with an initial lease term of no longer than one year, including, but not limited to,
a space rented in a mobilehome park or campground.
(11) "Rental price" for housing means any of the following:
(A) For housing rented within one year pnor to the time of the proclamation or declaration of emergency, the actual rental price
paid by the tenant. For housing not rented at the time of the declaration or proclamation, but rented, or offered for rent, within
one year prior to the proclamation or declaration of emergency, the most recent rental price offered before the proclamation or
WEST AW ®2020 Thomson Reuters. No claimm to original U.S. Government Works.
§ 396. States of emergency or local emergencies; unfair..., CA PENAL § 396
declaration of emergency. For housing rented at the time of the proclamation or declaration of emergency but which becomes
vacant while the proclamation or declaration of emergency remains in effect and which is subject to any ordinance, rule,
regulation, or initiative measure adopted by any local governmental entity that establishes a maximum amount that a landlord
may charge a tenant for rent, the actual rental price paid by the previous tenant or the amount specified in subparagraph (13)
whichever is greater. This amount may be increased by 5 percent if the housing was previously rented or offered for rent
unfurnished, and it is now being offered for rent fully furnished. This amount shall not be adjusted for any other good or service,
including, but not limited to, gardening or utilities currently or formerly provided in connection with the lease.
(B) For housing not rented and not offered for rent within one year prior to the proclamation or declaration of emergency, 160
percent of the fair market rent established by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. This amount
may be increased by 5 percent if the housing is offered for rent fully furnished. This amount shall not be adjusted for any other
good or service, including, but not limited to, gardening or utilities currently or foiwerly provided in connection with the lease.
(C) Housing advertised, offered, or charged, at a daily rate at the time of the declaration or proclamation of emergency, shall
be subject to the rental price described in subparagraph (A), if the housing continues to be advertised, offered, or charged, at a
daily rate Housing advertised offered or charged, on a daily basis at the time of the declaration or proclamation of emergency,
shall be subject to the rental price in subparagraph (B), if the housing is advertised offered, or charged, on a periodic lease
agreement after the declaration or proclamation of emergency.
(D) For mobilehome spaces rented to existing tenants at the time of the proclamation or declaration of emergency and subject
to a local rent control ordinance, the amount authorized under the local rent control ordinance. For new tenants who enter into
a rental agreement for a mobilehome space that is subject to rent control but not rented at the time of the proclamation or
declaration of emergency, the amount of rent last charged for a space in the same mobilehome park. For mobilehome spaces
not subject to a local rent control ordinance and not rented at the time of the proclamation or declaration of emergency, the
amount of rent last charged for the space.
(12) "Goods" has the same meaning as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 1689.5 of the Civil Code.
(k) This section does not preempt any local ordinance prohibiting the same or similar conduct or imposing a more severe penalty
for the same conduct prohibited by this section.
(1) A business offering an item for sale at a reduced price immediately prior to the proclamation or declaration of the emergency
may use the price at which it usually sells the item to calculate the price pursuant to subdivision (b) or (c).
(m) This section does not prohibit an owner from evicting a tenant for any lawful reason, including pursuant to Section 1161
of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Credits
(Added by Stats.1993-94, 1st Ex.Sess., c. 52 (A.B.36), § 2. Amended by Stats.1995, c. 91 (S B 975), § 123; Stats.2004, c. 492
(S B 1363), § 2; Stats.2016, c. 671 (A.B.2820), § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 2017; Stats 2018, c. 631 (A.B.1919), § 2, eff. Jan. 1, 2019.)
West's Ann Cal. Penal Code § 396, CA PENAL § 396
Current with urgency legislation through Ch 3 of 2020 Reg.Sess
l ES. A`'' () 2020 rhonr<son Re talc r>. No claim to oriGovernment. VVork€,.
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
EXECUTIVE ORDER N-44-20
WHEREAS on March 4, 2020, I proclaimed a State of Emergency to exist in
California as a result of the threat of COVID-19; and
WHEREAS despite sustained efforts, COVID-19 continues to spread and is
impacting nearly all sectors of California; and
WHEREAS it is vital that California's health care workers, first responders,
and others engaged in the fight against COVID-19 be able to obtain the
medical and emergency supplies they need, and that all Californians be able to
obtain food and consumer goods; and
WHEREAS the State is prepared to take strong action against price
gouging, profiteering and other unscrupulous business practices that threaten
these vital interests; and
WHEREAS under the provisions of Government Code section 8571, I find
that strict compliance with various statutes and regulations specified in this order
would prevent, hinder, or delay appropriate actions to prevent and mitigate the
effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor of the State of California,
in accordance with the authority vested in me by the State Constitution and
statutes of the State of California, and in particular, Government Code sections
8567, 8571, 8627 and 8665, do hereby issue the following Order to become
effective immediately:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1) The time limitation set forth in Penal Code section 396, subdivision (b),
prohibiting price gouging in time of emergency is hereby waived. All
prohibitions against price gouging set forth in subdivision (b) shall be in
effect through September 4, 2020
2) In addition to the prohibitions set forth in Penal Code section 396, a
person or other entity (including but not limited to, any business
enterprise of any kind) shall not —from April.4, 2020 until September 4,
2020, and except as set forth below —sell or offer to sell any item from
among the following categories of goods for a price that is more than
10 percent greater than the highest price charged by that person or
entity for that item on February 4, 2020:
• Food items;
• Consumer goods;
• Medical or emergency supplies; and
• Any other materials previously designated by the U.S. Secretary
of Health and Human Services as Scarce Materials or Threatened
Materials pursuant to section 102 of the Defense Production Act,
50 U.S.C. § 4512.
A price increase greater than the 10 percent increase specified above
shall not be unlawful if the seller can prove either of the following:
a) The increase was directly attributable to additional costs
imposed on the seller by suppliers of the item, and the price is no
more than 10 percent greater than the total of the cost to the
seller plus the markup customarily applied by the seller for that
item in the usual course of business on February 4, 2020; or
b) The seller was offering the relevant item for sale at a reduced
price on February 4, 2020, and the increased price is not more
than 10 percent greater than the price at which the seller
ordinarily sold the item.
Additionally, and notwithstanding the foregoing, it shall not be a
violation of this Paragraph 2 to sell or offer to sell any medical or
e mergency supplies to the State (including, but not limited to, any
agency, department, board, commission, or office of the State), or to
any political subdivision of the State, on terms acceptable to the State
or to the relevant political subdivision of the State, as determined by
the Governor's Office of Emergency Services (as to sales or offers of
sale to the State) or by the officer or entity within the political
subdivision that is responsible for procuring such supplies (as to sales or
o ffers of sale to that subdivision).
3) If a person or other entity (including, but not limited to, any business
e nterprise of any kind) did not offer an item for sale on February 4,
2020, and that item is among the categories of goods listed in
Paragraph 2, that person or entity shall not —from April 4, 2020 until
September 4, 2020, and except as set forth below sell or offer to sell
that item for an unconscionably excessive price.
For purposes of this Paragraph 3, a price is unconscionably excessive if
that price is more than 50 percent greater than whichever of the
following applies:
a) The amount that the person or entity paid for the item; or
b) If the person or entity did not purchase the item, the total
cost, to the person or entity, of producing and selling the
item.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, it shall not be a violation of this
Paragraph 3 to sell or offer to sell any medical or emergency supplies
to the State (including, but not limited to, any agency, department,
board, commission, or office of the State), or to any political subdivision
of the State, on any terms acceptable to the State or to the relevant
political subdivision of the State, as determined by the Governor's
Office of Emergency Services (as to sales or offers of sale to the State)
or by the officer or entity within the political subdivision that is
responsible for procuring such supplies (as to sales or offers of sale to
that subdivision).
4) Each instance in which an item is sold or offered for sale in a manner
prohibited by Paragraph 2 or Paragraph 3 shall constitute a separate
violation of this Order. Each violation of this Order shall be a
misdemeanor punishable as set forth in Government Code section
8665. Each such violation shall also be redressable in the same manner
as any other unlawful business practice under the Unfair Competition
Law, Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq., and as
otherwise provided by the laws of the State. These remedies are
cumulative.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that as soon as hereafter possible, this Order be
filed in the Office of the Secretary of State and that widespread publicity and
notice be given of this Order.
This Order is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits,
substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity, against the State of
California, its agencies, departments, entities, officers, employees, or any other
person.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set
my hand and caused the Great Seal of the
State Af California to be affixed this 3rd day
of A• it 2020.
IN NEW OM
vernor of California
ATTEST:
ALEX PADILLA
Secretary of State