“The days of the sloppy, imprecise, and inaccurate 3 Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit are over.  Courts are scrutinizing your 3 Day Notices for compliance with  Cal. CCP Section 1161(2) very closely in light of the published appellate opinion in Eshagian v. Cepeda.    So please double check the information in your 3 day notice for factual and numerical accuracy and that it contains all the required language based on California law.  You can review a copy of the opinion in Eshagian v. Cepeda at     https://courts.ca.gov/opinion/published/2025-06-26/b340941.

Landlord groups and associations attempted to have this opinion “DEPUBLISHED” but the California Supreme Court just recently  denied the petition to depublish.   So trial courts in your local venue will follow the rules in this opinion.

The Court held on page 2 of the main opinion that the

“three-day notice to pay rent or quit served by the landlord, Joseph Eshagian, pursuant to section 1161, subdivision (2) (section 1161(2)), is invalid for failure to make clear by when and how Cepeda had to pay the rent, and that Cepeda would lose possession of the premises if he did not timely cure the default.  Accordingly, Eshagian’s complaint incorporating the three-day
notice failed to state a cause of action for unlawful detainer.”

Please review pages 25 to 30 of this opinion- which discusses the requirements for a 3 Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit.  The important rules are as follows:  the notice must state that the landlord would repossess the premises if the tenant did not pay rent prior to expiration of the 3 day notice period. Titling the document “3 Day Notice to Pay or Quit” was not sufficiently code compliant.   The notice must state when the notice period commenced and ended, and must inform the tenant that the 3 day period excludes weekends and judicial holidays.   The notice must provide a clear address where rent could be paid- not merely the unit where the tenant lives.

Our recommendation is to follow the rules set forth in this opinion for your 3 day notices so you can defeat a tenant’s alleged defense that the notice is not lawful or compliant with California law.   This will help you if the tenant files a demurrer, motion for summary judgement, or attempt to raise this defense at trial.”

By Nate Bernstein, Esq., Managing Attorney of LA Real Estate Law Group   Ph:  (818) 383-5759

Nate Bernstein, Esq., is the Managing Counsel of LA Real Estate Law Group, and a member of the State Bar of California and his practice concentrates in the areas of complex real estate title litigation, commercial litigation, landlord tenant law, employment law, and bankruptcy matters. Attorney Bernstein served as in house corporate litigation counsel at Fidelity National Title Insurance Company, and represented the company subsidiaries and insured institutional lenders. He is a 32 year veteran Los Angeles real estate and business attorney and trial lawyer. Mr. Bernstein also has expertise in bankruptcy law, the federal bankruptcy court system, creditor’s rights and out of court workout solutions. He serves as an expert witness on real estate, title, joint venture, and other business issues.

Mr. Bernstein, a frequent speaker at apartment owners association seminars, and has been a featured speaker with the ANP, AAGLA, California Associations of Realtors, and the Collateral Lenders Association, and the Beverly Hills Bar Association. He created www.laquiettitleattorney.com, a leading educational resource on quiet title real estate litigation. LA Real Estate Law Group handles litigation in Los Angeles, Ventura County, Orange County, Inland Empire, and San Diego. For more information or to schedule a professional consultation, please contact the office at (818) 383-5759, or email natebernstein44@gmail.com.