@choeshow For sixty-something, I'd say she's keeping it pretty tight. Could have used a little cleanup at the bikini line.
English
Reality-Based Lawyer
924 posts
Reality-Based Lawyer
@realitybasedlaw
Attorney and landlady in north LA County, fighting for rational rental laws. Former newspaper journo. Non-socialist YIMBY. Grew up in Glendale rental housing.
Palmdale, CA Katılım Aralık 2025
850 Takip Edilen278 Takipçiler
Please bleach my eyes. Woke mayor of Toronto. Hard to say if she's a CCP plant.
But if the goal is to confuse and trigger people in the West...mission accomplished.
Libs of TikTok@libsoftiktok
This is the mayor of Toronto This is real
English
English
@AGHamilton29 @CanfieldKenny He absolutely should not go to prison. He should be treated like any other first-time violent offender in NYC, which means he should have his charge dropped if he isn’t arrested in the next six months and completes some kind of rehab program.
English
Kiswani is an open supporter of terrorism and violence (see below). The idiot who plotted to copy the tactics she supports against others to harm her is a moron who turned a particularly awful individual into a victim.
He should go to prison.
The New York Times@nytimes
Breaking News: Law enforcement officials are said to have disrupted a plot to assassinate Nerdeen Kiswani, the leader of one of New York’s most active pro-Palestinian protest groups. nyti.ms/4bGRsry
English
Antoine Watson is smiling and his S.F. taxpayer funded lawyers are hugging him after he got off for killing an 84-year-old man.
English
Settlement is common and typically desirable in these cases. The clients tend to be highly price-sensitive, so they really don't want to risk extra hearings, or the possibility of a set-aside followed by free tenant representation and a cash/jury demand.
Also, it's not uncommon for defendants to lie and say their default is the result of being misled by the landlord. This one seemed particularly likely to do so for reasons I won't detail here.
And, frankly. I wanted the court to see my client. He's a nice, elderly Mexican grandpa who really got taken for a ride by this tenant. He's also a hands-on guy who wanted to be involved.
English
@realitybasedlaw What are they ex parteing that involved evidence, your client to appear or even settlement? I had an attorney file ex parte to dismiss the case and ex parte habitability/landlord needs to hire a plumber antics and nothing required my client to come.
I wouldn’t expect to settle.
English
Fourth ex parte no-show by tenant this morning, fourth day in a row, followed by a fifth ex parte notice just before the 10 am cutoff for Monday.
I told the court I wouldn't be appearing or having my client do yet another one-hour dry run from Pacoima, missing work. Judge said he'd make a note to the file in case she showed up.
She will show up, eventually. These repeated ex parte notices and no-shows are one way the savvy deadbeats wear down landlords.
The prior time I evicted this tenant, she showed up at her default ex parte hearing with a list of complaints about the home. Wonder if she'll do that this time to justify not paying rent for a year.
Reality-Based Lawyer@realitybasedlaw
Just got ex parte notice for the fourth day in a row from a defaulted tenant who hasn't shown up for the past three days in a row. Each day, my client missed work, drove an hour, and paid attorney fees. Tenant has been in possession a year and never paid rent. My client, a blue-collar Mexican immigrant, let her in because he bought her untrue sob story. I know it wasn't true, because I evicted her from her previous residence. I made the settlement deal she violated by leaving weeks late, and not paying the small amount of money she agreed to for the extra time she was allowed. My previous client, understandably, didn't want to pay extra attorney fees to go back to court, get her record unsealed, and get a worthless money judgment. But even if they had, my client had no idea how to check her records. He just believed her -- wrongly figuring if it didn't work out, he could easily evict her. He's learned his lesson. He won't be helping poor mothers with sad stories anymore, and he may just sell the place. It's housing providers like him that the system is driving out of business.
English
Well, we do have a default judgment. The problem is that it takes months to get a lockout. So, defendants have all that time to file motions to set aside the judgment. Typically, they lie and claim the process server didn't really serve them.
That's what this one did last time I evicted her, and that's what she's doing now. Or, that's what she keeps noticing us for -- then no-showing.
English
My in-laws' tenant from hell did exactly this. Just one no-show after another. In a sane world, this would result in a default judgment and a next-day lockout.
Reality-Based Lawyer@realitybasedlaw
Fourth ex parte no-show by tenant this morning, fourth day in a row, followed by a fifth ex parte notice just before the 10 am cutoff for Monday. I told the court I wouldn't be appearing or having my client do yet another one-hour dry run from Pacoima, missing work. Judge said he'd make a note to the file in case she showed up. She will show up, eventually. These repeated ex parte notices and no-shows are one way the savvy deadbeats wear down landlords. The prior time I evicted this tenant, she showed up at her default ex parte hearing with a list of complaints about the home. Wonder if she'll do that this time to justify not paying rent for a year.
English
It is my conservative beliefs, not my liberal ones, that cause me to agree with this.
In particular: I don't believe women on public assistance should be staying home. In my observation, it's an incentive for low-skilled women to have babies with unsuitable men.
Also, I don't think one partner should have to shoulder the whole load.
English
There are a LOT of policymakers, commentators, and newspaper reporters who believe that 2 fulltime jobs + formal daycare is the only good model. They bristle if you suggest that it would be good to help more mothers stay at home with their children.
Leah Libresco Sargeant@LeahLibresco
"When Third Way asked 1,000 parents with children 5 and under what their preferred form of childcare would be..." -11% want center-based daycare -49% would stay at home -15% would prefer to rely on family, friends, or neighbors therebuild.pub/p/democrats-da…
English
@DavidPHerrick We have the same problem with worthless judgments. Most evicted people don't have wages high enough to garnish even when they do work.
English
@realitybasedlaw It’s not always next day, but it’s pretty fast. I’ve only done it on my own properties, but I do not recall any delays. Now, the judgement is worthless because wages cannot be garnished in Texas, but the tenant is out at least.
English
Next day lockout?! Unheard of here, amazing.
Understand: We do already have a default judgment against her because she didn't answer the lawsuit. What she did was wait three weeks (because lockout takes months here), then start giving these emergency one-day notices to set aside the judgment. She gives them, so we have to show up to defend, but then she doesn't show.
I don't know her basis, but she'll probably lie about not getting served with the summons and complaint.
English
@realitybasedlaw Wow! In Texas, tenant does not show and judge signs whatever landlord requests: back rent, rent due under remainder of lease, and attorney’s fees. Plus, sheriff will show up the next day to lock out tenant. California is more messed up that I possibly would have imagined.
English
They do allow remote appearances in UD court in LA County.
But for this type of hearing, it was not a good idea. First, I wouldn't have been able to take any documents the tenant brought. (I work close to court anyway.) My client speaks decent English, but probably not sufficient for the speed and complexity of court, so he'd need an interpreter, which makes remote more difficult. Also, he wouldn't be able to sign a settlement agreement, or easily review any evidence the tenant brought.
If she shows Monday, I'll have him appear remotely.
English
@realitybasedlaw They really need to allow remote in unlawful detainer court. I understand that there will be complete insanity if they do but I once had three ex parte notices to drive from Ontario to Santa Monica in a week by an opposing attorney who failed to show up each time.
English
I think there should be either a statewide, or nationwide, fraud registry akin to Megan's Law.
It's nearly impossible to get DAs to prosecute financial crimes, no offense. But grifters keep grifting IME. And now, we have a state law automatically sealing all financial felonies (and most others) four years after the perp gets off probation.
English
There are now extensive back & forth with Newsom and others in the media regarding the exposure of massive fraud here in California. Anytime someone posts on social media about the massive fraud happening here, Newsom immediately shouts back on social that “we” are arresting people and punishing fraud.
Just so we are all clear, most of us here in CA have known about the fraud crisis for a long time. And, anytime I see Newsom say anything about public safety - really all you have to say is “Gascón.”
Newsom brought Gascón to SF. He appointed him SF police chief. He appointed him SFDA. He supported and endorsed him when he ran for SFDA. And he supported and endorsed him when he ran for LADA - twice.
When Gascón took office in LA, almost all fraud type charges were considered $0 bail. Yes. The fraudsters were all just released. This was a written policy. Any enhancements for insurance fraud, check fraud, ID theft, credit card fraud, real estate fraud, medical services fraud, etc were removed completely. Gone. Even if we could prove them. Again, a written policy. So if there were elderly or vulnerable victims, a very high monetary loss and/or multiple victims - we were NOT allowed to charge enhancements. Ever.
I never saw or heard Newsom make one peep about victims of fraud or what Gascón did to LA. Not one.
Gascón and Newsom also supported Prop 47. That made most check fraud a misdemeanor. Gascón and Newsom also didn’t support Prop 36.
Newsom is now all over our fraud crisis in CA, almost 7 years after he has been governor, because … the media is now involved. But a leader prioritizes public safety even when the media isn’t reporting on it. Our governor is supposed to care about how crime affects working families, the elderly, vulnerable victims, children and all of us … not just how he or she looks in the public eye.
English
@feelsdesperate I was a feminist because I wanted to make good money.
Also because I didn't want loser guys telling me what to do.
The definition seems to have done a 180.
English
‘Feminism’ is when you become financially insolvent while supporting your husband and his girlfriend while sleeping in the guest bedroom and acting like you like it, we’re told.
All the cultural programming of the past decade has been a terrible, terrible mistake.
Madame Fragonard@useful_emetic
@purplcabbage despite selling a tv show to Hulu that ran 3 seasons, she is not financially solvent. she dismisses any questions on whether she’s the only breadwinner as “deranged“ & “racist.” she also sleeps in the guest bedroom while the pair sleep in another room & says she’s happy about it
English
@Jesse_Leg Unintended consequences? Clearly we just need to pass laws against them.
English
Elizabeth Warren’s entire political project essentially amounts to whipping up outrage about how expensive everything is and how scarce essential goods are—then proposing policies that make those things more expensive and reduce their supply.
Alec Stapp@AlecStapp
This is why we must hold the line against slopulism in housing policy. At first Warren's position was "investors can build as many apartment buildings as they want, they just can't build single-family homes to rent" Now she is sending menacing letters to institutional investors who build multi-family apartments and manufactured housing.
English
@BarryRoland19 We've had that happen recently, too. It's constant surprises.
English
Honestly, total BS that a carrier can unilaterally make amendments to a policy.
Sure, there's a change in premium so I'll get a refund, but...this ain't what I bargained for bro.
English
Great news on insurance.
After binding and paying the premium, following a lengthy comparison to other policies, our carrier has now stripped away Premises Liability from my coverage.
For no reason. After 1 month.
LOL. Fucking shitshow insurance in CA.
BarryRoland19@BarryRoland19
Me: “dad, insurance at property X is going up from $4k to $12k” Dad: “call this guy” Me: “dad — I’ve already shopped it with three well known brokers. we’re not going to get a better price. who is this guy even?” Dad: “just call him” Next day Me: “dad…your guy came in at $8k”
English
@fsholars Yes, yes, yes.
Landlords who rent to the poor live in a different universe.
English
This is probably sp6r's most repeated point, but there is a real divergence of interests between marginal renters and the median renter
sp6r=underrated@sp6runderrated
I live in San Francisco. San Francisco has a shit ton of tenant protections. It is a terrible, terrible, TERRIBLE place to be a tenant because you can't move.
English
@asglidden @ParkDerekS @asglidden I've been trying to get another term going for these types other than The Poor. Because I don't think they should share the public sympathy for decent people who simply don't have money. I personally use "the criminal-welfare world." Any other ideas?
English
@ParkDerekS Oh it's long in the past; before we even met. But sitting in court and seeing the parade of grifters getting paid off, one by one, was one of those life experiences that gave her the courage to hate The Poor (to my great benefit!).
English
This is what peaked my wife. Her parents rented to a deadbeat woman with a prior bankruptcy. Her dad knew it was a risk, but thought, well, everyone deserves a second chance.
Tenant paid rent for a short period, then just...nothing. They filed for eviction (tenant actually tried filing a restraining order to stop the case-in-progress, lol). Tenant stretched out the hearings for months, citing one made-up catastrophe after another as justification for not showing up.
While waiting for trial, wife saw people coming through the courtroom who hadn't paid rent in a year successfully bargaining for $50k cash payoffs to leave. Wife's family was offered something similar, but took it to trial on principle. When they finally won, it took the sheriff something like 6 months to evict.
Anyway in all the mess they found out that scamming landlords for buyouts was basically her life's work. She had like a dozen of these evictions, but they never showed on her background check because they kept getting sealed.
Being a landlord in California is a sucker's game.
Real Estate Lawyer@SinaiLawFirm
Do you want to know why rent is so expensive in LA? Why the application process takes so long? Why landlords want so much info from you? Here is a recent story: A family was referred to me for their eviction case. They were heading to a jury trial in one month and didn't have a lawyer, yet. They did all the paperwork and filing themselves, in-house to save on legal fees. And surprisingly, they did a great job. They filed the paperwork with LAHD. Gave proper notice to the tenants. I reviewed their paperwork and it was better quality than 90% of other eviction lawyers. I didn't see any viable way to dismiss the case on a technicality. As long as they were properly represented in trial, the family was going to win the eviction. They did everything by the book. Followed all the local rules. Gave all the necessary notices. The family told me the judge ordered the parties to mediate at the first court appearance. The family attended the mediation in court without a lawyer. The tenant was provided a lawyer by the city, for free. At the mediation the lawyer for the tenants offered this settlement: 1. 4 months to vacate the property 2. Cash to leave, paid upfront 3. Waiver of all owed rent 4. Sealed record They rejected the offer, of course. Why would they accept this? The family then asked me a great question. "What is our best case scenario with you in trial?" Based on my review, I gave them my most realistic estimate of the best case scenario in trial: 1. Both parties announce ready at the next trial date (1 month away) and trial takes 3 days. We win the trial. 2. Sheriff locks out the tenant 75 days after the trial. 3. about 110 days to possession. 4. Gave them an estimate cost for fees/prep time. 5. No viable collection of back rent, tenants had no assets. Obviously, this was the best case scenario. It could be worse. Trial can be delayed. While I was confident we are going to win, juries are unpredictable. This is where we had a surreal moment of collective clarity. The settlement offer they rejected is basically their best case scenario if they win the trial. This was not a coincidence. The attorney for the tenants asked for pretty much the same amount I quoted them for my fees. The lawyer for the tenants knew the family had to hire a lawyer for a jury trial. The lawyer knows it takes the sheriff 2-3 months to lockout after a judgment. The lawyer knows it's hard (and expensive) to collect against tenants with no assets. State and local government created a system in which cases take forever to litigate, eviction laws are extremely complex and technical, easy to dismiss cases, only one side has to pay a lawyer, and worst of all, possession enforcement takes 60-90 days instead of 5. And it's all getting worse. The leverage for the tenants is systemic. It's by design. Why would the tenants make any other offer? The landlords are left with no real options but a shitty settlement. There are no real choice. Even when you do everything right, you still lose. Tenants don't pay rent during evictions. They had no viable way to win the trial. There were no habitability issues. The landlords posted all the notices. Never raised the rent. Didn't retaliate. The landlords did everything right. And the tenants still win. The mother looked at me and asked "our base case in trial is the same as the shitty settlement offer? Are you telling me we should have taken the offer we rejected?" I didn't know how to respond.
English
@SinaiLawFirm Didn't see this 2024 comment when I.comented to your updated post. Do we know yet whether it's a legal "right," or just more $$$?
English
City of Los Angeles already has a well funded program to help tenants, and this resolution will fund it further ($$$ coming from ULA taxes). It's done through approved legal non-profits offering free help.
Right now tenants facing eviction are offered free help at every stage of the eviction. City calls tenants and even goes door-to-door after the eviction notice is served (since those have to be posted).
After filing the court sends the tenant a 'notice of Unlawful Detainer' and it has phone numbers for free legal help, including non-profits such as LegalAid LA.
Tenants can visit the court and get assistance filling forms at the self-help desk, and waiver from all court fee via a fee waiver.
There's always a rep from these non-profits at the courthouse too, ready to sign up clients without a lawyer.
Just like the County's program. that passed last month, my guess this ordinance will just push more money to those existing funnels of legal defense rather than starting a new thing from scratch.
With $68m/year you can hire plenty of lawyers (although not sure how quickly you can train them, or get them competent to stand trial). Whoever they hire - are set to go against a handful of very experienced, well-oiled eviction firms that control about 80% of the case volume in the county. You can fit those lawyers into a Starbucks. Very small community.
What I don't know - if the program is an actual 'right to counsel' - in which tenants in any eviction case will have to be represented by counsel or the case gets delayed, or just more money.
English
City of Los Angeles is plans to fund $68,000,000 a year for free legal representation for tenants facing evictions
Not passed yet. Guessing this will just further fund existing programs. Great for attorneys like me, bad for tax payers!
English
No, I think the "right" means they'll have a basis to continue hearings until and unless they can get an attorney!
That happened with criminal defendants in Oregon -- PDs too stretched to represent, and then the case gets dismissed because it wasn't prosecuted in time.
I predict the nonprofits will claim heavy workloads as an excuse to delay hearings, and to set aside defaults.
English
If tenant shows and landlord doesn't, she will probably get her way. That's the risk of ignoring her.
I'll have to call court Monday to see if she's actually there, and run down if she is. The court will probably be sympathetic to why my client isn't there and continue the hearing.
English
Right, because until she shows, it's not even before the court.
Also, there's no sanction authority for frivolous ex parte notice.
The court does have the power to grant a penalty up to $1,000 under the law under which the tenant seems to set aside the default judgment. I'll definitely bring this up when I ask for it, once she appears.
But she is judgment proof. All these defendants are. And she has a free waiver, so she can keep filing BS until she is locked out.
English
@f2aler Yeah, civil litigation ex partes are typically not tweetworthy.
In family custody cases, they're often a weapon to harass opponents and drain their resources. Same in eviction court, but it only works against landlords, not for them.
English
@realitybasedlaw I literally had my first ex parte hearing in a long time this morning. It was my motion to advance hearing date. Super boring stuff
English
Off to court for this ex parte, fourth morning in a row.
Who wants to bet whether she'll show this time?
This defendant did the same a year ago to another client -- let her case go by default, waited a few weeks, then moved ex parte to set aside. She knows what she's doing.
Reality-Based Lawyer@realitybasedlaw
Just got ex parte notice for the fourth day in a row from a defaulted tenant who hasn't shown up for the past three days in a row. Each day, my client missed work, drove an hour, and paid attorney fees. Tenant has been in possession a year and never paid rent. My client, a blue-collar Mexican immigrant, let her in because he bought her untrue sob story. I know it wasn't true, because I evicted her from her previous residence. I made the settlement deal she violated by leaving weeks late, and not paying the small amount of money she agreed to for the extra time she was allowed. My previous client, understandably, didn't want to pay extra attorney fees to go back to court, get her record unsealed, and get a worthless money judgment. But even if they had, my client had no idea how to check her records. He just believed her -- wrongly figuring if it didn't work out, he could easily evict her. He's learned his lesson. He won't be helping poor mothers with sad stories anymore, and he may just sell the place. It's housing providers like him that the system is driving out of business.
English