On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Advocates’ Guide for Protecting Tenants’ Rights: Advanced Unlawful Detainer Defense 2019

Released on: Mar. 13, 2019
Running Time: 06:11:25
 Scholarships available

Full scholarships and discounts to attend PLI programs are widely available to attorneys working in nonprofit/legal services organizations; pro bono attorneys; government attorneys; judges and judicial law clerks; law professors and law students; senior attorneys (age 65 and over); law librarians and paralegals who work for nonprofit/legal services organizations; unemployed attorneys; and others with financial hardships.  We encourage all eligible attendees to complete and submit a PLI Scholarship Application

Attendees of prior unlawful detainer defense trainings including last year’s California Eviction Defense 2.0 learned the skills necessary to vigorously defend eviction lawsuits. This year’s training builds on those concepts, providing a more in-depth discussion of trial skills as well as fair housing issues and attorneys’ fees. We will also discuss the additional protections that apply to subsidized housing tenancies.

Lecture Topics [Total time 06:11:25]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.

  • Opening Remarks* [00:04:34]
    Madeline S. Howard
  • Unlawful Detainer Trials [01:48:46]
    Shirley Gibson, Erin Katayama, Monique Farris
  • Tenants’ Rights in Subsidized Housing: Evictions and Terminations [01:31:50]
    Lisa Greif, Navneet Grewal, Natalie Minev
  • Fair Housing Issues in Unlawful Detainers [01:30:05]
    Laurance Lee, Melissa A. Morris
  • Attorney Fees’ in Unlawful Detainers [01:16:10]
    Joshua J. Johnson, Richard A. Rothschild

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:

  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Unlawful Detainer Trial Practice Outline
    Lorraine A. López, Shirley Gibson, Erin Katayama
  • Sample Trial Brief—Hoarding
    Erin Katayama
  • Sample Trial Brief—Nonpayment of Rent Due to Disability
    Erin Katayama
  • Sample Trial Brief—Nuisance
    Erin Katayama
  • Defendant’s Proposed Jury Instructions
    Shirley Gibson
  • Defendant’s Proposed Special Jury Instruction Disability Discrimination
    Lorraine A. López, Shirley Gibson, Erin Katayama
  • Special Verdict Form
    Erin Katayama
  • Defendant’s Motion In Limine #1 to Exclude Evidence of Other, Irrelevant Conduct or Collateral Matters; Memorandum of Points and Authorities
    Erin Katayama
  • Defendant’s Motion In Limine to Exclude Improper Lay Witness Opinion and Speculation; Memorandum of Points and Authorities
    Erin Katayama
  • Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion In Limine to Exclude Evidence Regarding Defendant’s Disabilities and/or Medical Condition
    Erin Katayama
  • Defendant Tenant’s Request for Statement of Decision
    Shirley Gibson
  • Unlawful Detainer Trials (PowerPoint slides)
    Erin Katayama, Lorraine A. López, Shirley Gibson
  • Federally Subsidized Housing Overview
    Natalie Minev, Lisa Greif, Navneet Grewal
  • Pro Per Hearing and Hearing File Request—Section 8 HCV Termination
    Natalie Minev, Lisa Greif, Navneet Grewal
  • Hearing Prep Pro Per Packet—Section 8 HCV Termination Template
    Natalie Minev, Lisa Greif, Navneet Grewal
  • Certification of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, or Stalking, and Alternate Documentation, Form HUD-5382, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
    Natalie Minev, Navneet Grewal, Lisa Greif
  • Notice of Occupancy Rights under the Violence Against Women Act 2017, Form HUD-5380
    Natalie Minev, Lisa Greif, Navneet Grewal
  • Redacted Stipulation to Settle the Case and Court to Retain Jurisdiction under CCP 664.6—File to Remain Sealed and Confidential; Proposed Order
    Navneet Grewal, Natalie Minev, Lisa Greif
  • Redacted Ninety Days Notice to Vacate
    Natalie Minev, Lisa Greif, Navneet Grewal
  • Redacted Ten Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit
    Lisa Greif, Navneet Grewal, Natalie Minev
  • Redacted Termination of Assistance/Non Compliance Notice
    Natalie Minev, Lisa Greif, Navneet Grewal
  • Redacted Notice of Intended Action and Right to Hearing
    Natalie Minev, Lisa Greif, Navneet Grewal
  • Tenants’ Rights in Subsidized Housing: Evictions and Terminations (PowerPoint slides)
    Natalie Minev, Navneet Grewal, Lisa Greif
  • Anti-Discrimination Laws Protecting Tenants, Protections for People with Disabilities
    Laurance Lee, Melissa A. Morris
  • Rana v. Gu, 220 F.Supp.3d 989 (N.D. Cal. 2016)
    Melissa A. Morris, Laurance Lee
  • Redacted Request for Reasonable Accommodation, Legal Services of Northern California
    Laurance Lee
  • Sample Motion for Attorney Fees, Superior Court of California, County of Alameda
    Joshua J. Johnson, Richard A. Rothschild
  • Sample Memorandum of Costs, MC-010
    Richard A. Rothschild, Joshua J. Johnson
  • Sample Declaration in Support of Motion for Attorneys’ Fees
    Richard A. Rothschild
  • Sample Order on Motion for Award of Attorney’s Fees
    Joshua J. Johnson

Presentation Material

  • Unlawful Detainer Trials (PowerPoint slides)
    Monique Farris, Shirley Gibson, Erin Katayama
  • Tenants’ Rights in Subsidized Housing: Evictions and Terminations (PowerPoint slides)
    Lisa Greif, Navneet Grewal, Natalie Minev
  • Fair Housing Issues in Unlawful Detainers (PowerPoint slides)
    Laurance Lee, Melissa A. Morris
  • Claiming and Securing Attorneys' Fees in Unlawful Detainer Cases (PowerPoint slides)
    Joshua J. Johnson, Richard A. Rothschild
Chairperson(s)
Madeline S. Howard ~ Senior Attorney, Western Center on Law & Poverty
Speaker(s)
Monique Farris ~ Managing Attorney, Tenants' Rights Program, Centro Legal de la Raza
Shirley Gibson ~ Directing Attorney, Home Savers Project, Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County
Lisa Greif ~ Supervising Attorney, Bay Area Legal Aid
Navneet Grewal ~ Senior Attorney, Western Center on Law & Poverty
Joshua J. Johnson ~ Staff Attorney, Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles
Erin Katayama ~ Supervising Attorney, Homeless Advocacy Project, Justice & Diversity Center of The Bar Association of San Francisco
Laurance Lee ~ Staff Attorney, Legal Services of Northern California
Natalie Minev ~ Staff Attorney, Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles
Melissa A. Morris ~ Staff Attorney, Public Interest Law Project
Richard A. Rothschild ~ Director of Litigation, Western Center on Law & Poverty
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period. Effective January 1, 2019, the limit of distance education per reporting period will increase from 9 to 18 credits.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  All PLI products can fulfill New Hampshire’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  All PLI products can fulfill Puerto Rico’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “video replay” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 video replay credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  All PLI products can fulfill Washington’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.

Alberta (CPD-ALBERTA):  All PLI products can fulfill Alberta’s CPD requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Dubai (CLPD-DUBAI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill CLPD credit requirements.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as the “QAS Self-Study” delivery method. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

Certified Financial Planners (CFP):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CFP credit.

 

Related Items

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

Advocates’ Guide for Protecting Tenants’ Rights: Advanced Unlawful Detainer Defense 2019 Madeline S. Howard, Western Center on Law & Poverty
 
Share
Email

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2019 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2019 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.