Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am confused because I’ve read some lawyers state that Unlawful Detainers get converted to a tradition civil action or dismissed when possession is no longer at issue. When I view my case at the court it is still showing Unlawful Detainer as the case type. Shouldn’t this be marked as a civil case?
-This is in California.
Case details
-served 3 day NPR
- Filed answer stating I left the property
-Plaintiff got a money judgment against me so I’m assuming he converted the UD to a traditional civil case as no other case shows against me.
-Court still shows case type as Unlawful Detainer
You had an unlawful detainer filed, it was still an unlawful detainer that was filed even after you moved out.
It doesn't sound to me like it was dismissed if the landlord got a judgement against you.
It also sounds an awful lot like you didn't bother to show up in court.
Every tenant always has a story about how the eviction wasn't his fault. As a landlord, I politely listen and then automatically reject. In case you are wondering how this is going to affect your ability to rent a nice place.
I am confused because I’ve read some lawyers state that Unlawful Detainers get converted to a tradition civil action or dismissed when possession is no longer at issue. When I view my case at the court it is still showing Unlawful Detainer as the case type. Shouldn’t this be marked as a civil case?
It IS a civil case. It's a civil case called unlawful detainer. Just like there are civil cases called divorce, probate, personal injury, etc.
In CA an unlawful detainer action can include both possession and monetary damages.
Start reading from Section 1166. There is nothing in there that requires or allows the case to be called anything but unlawful detainer.
Unfortunately, when an unlawful detainer is file against you, it goes into a database for businesses that sell that info to landlords. All that matters to future landlords is the fact that an UD was filed against you, whether or not you won. And it's not illegal to discriminate against you for having an UD filed against you - whether you won or not.
Unfortunately, when an unlawful detainer is file against you, it goes into a database for businesses that sell that info to landlords. All that matters to future landlords is the fact that an UD was filed against you, whether or not you won. And it's not illegal to discriminate against you for having an UD filed against you - whether you won or not.
Anytime a LL files a UD, they lose. Their expenses are attorneys, lost rent, damages, vacancy, aggravation, etc.
If a LL has to file a UD, regardless of the outcome of the case, they are a tenant to be avoided.
Anytime a LL files a UD, they lose. Their expenses are attorneys, lost rent, damages, vacancy, aggravation, etc.
If a LL has to file a UD, regardless of the outcome of the case, they are a tenant to be avoided.
Granted, that's usually the case and it was one of my criteria. But, sometimes a tenant really is a victim of a bad landlord who can file a UD unnecessarily or unlawfully. Not all landlords are perfect, just like not all tenants are awful.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
