Source: http://ca.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20130909_0001474.C09.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2017-04-29 13:48:56
Document Index: 704691812

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1200', '§ 1200', '§ 1200', '§ 162', '§ 1200', '§ 162', '§ 1200']

| Sylvia Landfield Trust v. City of Los Angeles
Sylvia Landfield Trust; Maria A. Lane; Jeff Kern; Ram Gill; Khushwant Gill, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.City of Los Angeles; Antonio Villaraigosa, Mayor; Rockard J. Delgadillo, City Attorney, Defendants-Appellees.
Submitted February 7, 2013 [*] Pasadena, California Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Josephine Staton Tucker, District Judge, Presiding D.C. No. 2:09-cv-01798-JST-RZ Lee Grant, Law Office of Lee Grant, Encino, California, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
OPINION PREGERSON, Circuit Judge.
This case involves a constitutional challenge to the defendant City of Los Angeles's ("City") Rent Escrow Account Program ("REAP"). REAP is an administrative program codified in the Los Angeles Municipal Code ("LAMC"). The Los Angeles Housing Department ("Housing Department") places property into REAP when a landlord fails to repair habitability violations. See Housing Department Rent Adjustment Commission Regulations ("RACR") § 1200.04. When a property is placed into REAP, tenants pay a reduced rent. RACR §§ 1200.05–.06. The Housing Department determines the amount of the reduced rent based on the severity of the habitability violations. RACR §§ 1200.05–.06. Tenants may choose to pay their reduced rent to either their landlord or an escrow account maintained by the Housing Department. LAMC § 162.07; RACR §§ 1200.05, 1200.13A. If tenants pay into the escrow account, the tenant, landlord, or Housing Department may apply to the escrow account's manager for funds to repair the habitability violations in the tenant's housing. LAMC § 162.07; RACR § 1200.13(B).
Plaintiffs are four landlords whose separate apartment buildings were placed into REAP by the City. Plaintiffs in their complaint allege that REAP, as applied to them, violated their substantive due process rights. The district court dismissed plaintiffs' complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ...