Danger Panda, LLC v. Launiu
Facts: A landlord removes a residential unit occupied by a tenant and their minor child from the rental market. As required by a local rent ordinance, the landlord provides relocation pay to the tenant, but not to the minor.
Claim: The tenant seeks compensation for the minor, claiming the minor is entitled to relocation pay since the minor is a lawful occupant of the unit.
Counter claim: The landlord claims no compensation is owed to the minor under the local rent ordinance since the minor is not a tenant under the rent ordinance, as they are not in exclusive possession of the unit.
Holding: A California court of appeals holds the landlord is not required to compensate the minor since they do not qualify as a tenant under the rent ordinance, as the minor is not in exclusive possession of the unit, and their lawful occupancy is derivative of their parents’ tenancy. [Danger Panda, LLC v. Launiu (April 4th, 2017) _CA4th_]