On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

California Eviction Defense: Protecting Low-Income Tenants 2014 (Free)

Released on: Mar. 26, 2014
Running Time: 06:14:09

Running Time Segment Title Faculty Format
[01:52:12] Eviction Process: Overview of the Basics and Affirmative Defenses in Unlawful Detainer Actions Laura Lane ~ Director, Housing Practice, East Bay Community Law Center
Stephanie Haffner ~ Senior Litigator, Western Center on Law & Poverty
Madeline Howard ~ Staff Attorney, Western Center on Law & Poverty
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[01:15:05] Eviction Defense After Foreclosure Kari Rudd ~ Staff Attorney, Bay Area Legal Aid
Leah F. Simon-Weisberg ~ Legal Director, Tenants Together
Madeline Howard ~ Staff Attorney, Western Center on Law & Poverty
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[01:00:00] Evictions & Terminations in Subsidized Housing Maria E. Palomares ~ Staff Attorney, Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County
Navneet Grewal ~ Staff Attorney, Western Center on Law & Poverty
Kent Qian ~ Staff Attorney, National Housing Law Project
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[01:00:15] Fair Housing Protections Maria E. Palomares ~ Staff Attorney, Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County
Navneet Grewal ~ Staff Attorney, Western Center on Law & Poverty
Karlo Ng ~ Staff Attorney, National Housing Law Project
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[01:01:20] Pro Bono Opportunities in Eviction Defense William T Tanner ~ Directing Attorney, Legal Aid Society of Orange County
Phong S Wong ~ Pro Bono Director, Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles
On-Demand MP3 MP4

In the current economic climate an increasing number of low-income Californians are facing eviction.  Unfortunately, many tenants are evicted without the benefit of legal counsel to guide them through the process or the representation necessary to vigorously defend against unlawful actions.  As a result, families face the very real possibility of homelessness. This training is designed to help mitigate the crisis by providing attorneys with a basic understanding of eviction defense and housing law and an opportunity to connect with non-profit legal service agencies able to facilitate pro bono representation of low income families facing this predicament.

Lecture Topics  [Total time 06:14:09]

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

  • Program Overview and Introductions* [00:05:17]
    S. Lynn Martinez
  • Eviction Process: Overview of the Basics and Affirmative Defenses in Unlawful Detainer Actions [01:52:12]
    Stephanie Haffner, Madeline Howard, Laura Lane
  • Eviction Defense After Foreclosure [01:15:05]
    Madeline Howard, Kari Rudd, Leah F. Simon-Weisberg
  • Evictions & Terminations in Subsidized Housing [01:00:00]
    Navneet Grewal, Maria E. Palomares, Kent Qian
  • Fair Housing Protections [01:00:15]
    Navneet Grewal, Maria E. Palomares, Karlo Ng
  • Pro Bono Opportunities in Eviction Defense [01:01:20]
    William T. Tanner, Phong S. Wong

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

  • Unlawful Detainer Litigation
    Laura Lane
  • Common Uses of Fair Housing Law In California Eviction Defense Practice
    Stephanie Haffner
  • Eviction Process Flow Chart
    Laura Lane
  • Significant Tenant Rights Cases of 2013
    Madeline Howard
  • Eviction Process Forms
    Madeline Howard
  • Eviction Defense 101: How to Successfully Defend Unlawful Detainer Actions in California (PowerPoint Slides)
    Laura Lane, Madeline Howard, Stephanie Haffner
  • Protections for California Tenants in Foreclosed Homes
    Madeline Howard
  • How Tenants Are to Use the Claim to Right of Possession to Stop an Eviction
    Madeline Howard
  • Tenant Eviction Process After A California Foreclosure Flow Chart
    Leah F. Simon-Weisberg
  • Title VII—Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act (PTFA), Public Law 111-22, (May 20, 2009)
    Madeline Howard
  • Eviction Defense After Foreclosure (PowerPoint Slides)
    Kari Rudd, Leah F. Simon-Weisberg, Madeline Howard
  • Statutes, Regulations, and Recent Notable Subsidized Housing Eviction Cases
    Navneet Grewal
  • Opinion, Community Corporation of Santa Monica v. Eisman, Appellate Division of the Superior Court, State of California, County of Los Angeles (2012)
    Kent Qian
  • Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss, Swords To Plowshares v. Smith, United States District Court for the Northern District of California (2002)
    Kent Qian
  • Order Granting Motion Without Leave to Amend, Swords to Plowshares v. Kemp, United States District Court for the Northern District of California (2005)
    Kent Qian
  • Judgment on Appeal from the Superior Court County of Orange North Justice Center, Cadigan Arbor Park v. Vohra, Superior Court of California, County of Orange, Appellate Division (2006)
    Kent Qian
  • Opinion, Housing Authority of the County of Kern v. Williams, Superior Court of California, County of Kern, Appellate Department (1985)
    Kent Qian
  • Per Curiam Opinion, Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino v. Kelly, Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino, Appellate Division (2010)
    Kent Qian
  • Three Day Notice to Quit—(Nuisance)
    Kent Qian
  • Defending Evictions from Federally-Subsidized Housing (PowerPoint Slides)
    Kent Qian, Maria E. Palomares, Navneet Grewal
  • VAWA 2013 Continues Vital Housing Protections for Survivors and Provides New Safeguards
    Karlo Ng
  • Order Granting Petition for Writ of Mandate, Zheng and Chen v. Superior Court of The State of California, County of San Francisco, Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, Appellate Division (2008)
    Navneet Grewal
  • Assessing Claims of Housing Discrimination Against Victims of Domestic Violence Under the Fair Housing Act And The Violence Against Women Act, Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, February 9, 2011
    Navneet Grewal
  • Sample Defendant’s Trial Brief
    Maria E. Palomares
  • Complaint of Discriminatory Treatment in Violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000(d)
    Navneet Grewal
  • Evictions, Disability, Domestic Violence, and Language (PowerPoint Slides)
    Karlo Ng, Maria E. Palomares, Navneet Grewal
  • Taking on A Pro Bono Eviction Defense Case (PowerPoint Slides)
    Phong S. Wong
  • Unlawful Detainers & Incubators (PowerPoint Slides)
    William T. Tanner

Presentation Material

  • Eviction Process: Overview of the Basics and Affirmative Defenses in Unlawful Detainer Actions: Eviction Defense 101: How to Successfully Defend Unlawful Detainer Actions in California PowerPoint Slides
    Stephanie Haffner, Madeline Howard, Laura Lane
  • Eviction Defense After Foreclosure: Eviction Defense After Foreclosure PowerPoint Slides
    Madeline Howard, Kari Rudd, Leah F. Simon-Weisberg
  • Evictions & Terminations in Subsidized Housing: Defending Evictions from Federally-Subsidized Housing PowerPoint Slides
    Navneet Grewal, Maria E Palomares, Kent Qian
  • Fair Housing Protections: Evictions, Disability, Domestic Violence, and Language PowerPoint Slides
    Navneet Grewal, Maria E Palomares, Karlo Ng
  • Pro Bono Opportunities in Eviction Defense: Taking on a Pro Bono Eviction Defense Case PowerPoint Slides
    Phong S Wong
  • Pro Bono Opportunities in Eviction Defense: Unlawful Detainers & Incubators PowerPoint Slides
    William T. Tanner
Chairperson(s)
S. Lynn Martinez ~ Managing Attorney/Senior Litigator, Western Center on Law & Poverty
Speaker(s)
Navneet Grewal ~ Staff Attorney, Western Center on Law & Poverty
Stephanie Haffner ~ Senior Litigator, Western Center on Law & Poverty
Madeline Howard ~ Staff Attorney, Western Center on Law & Poverty
Laura Lane ~ Director, Housing Practice, East Bay Community Law Center
Karlo Ng ~ Staff Attorney, National Housing Law Project
Maria E. Palomares ~ Staff Attorney, Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County
Kent Qian ~ Staff Attorney, National Housing Law Project
Kari Rudd ~ Staff Attorney, Bay Area Legal Aid
Leah F. Simon-Weisberg ~ Legal Director, Tenants Together
William T. Tanner ~ Directing Attorney, Legal Aid Society of Orange County
Phong S. Wong ~ Pro Bono Director, Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles

PLI makes every effort to accredit its On-Demand Web Programs and Segments.  Please check the Credit Information box to the right of each product description for credit information specific to your state.


On-Demand Web Programs and Segments
 are approved in:

Alabama1, Alaska, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho*, Illinois , Iowa2*, Kansas, Kentucky*, Louisiana, Maine*, Mississippi, Missouri3, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire4, New Jersey, New Mexico5, New York6,  North Carolina7, North Dakota, Ohio8, Oklahoma9, Oregon*, Pennsylvania10, Rhode Island11, South Carolina, Tennessee12, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia13, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin14 and Wyoming*.

Iowa, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin DO NOT approve Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs.


Please Note: The State Bar of Arizona does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education requirement. PLI programs may qualify for credit based on the requirements outlined in the MCLE Regulations and Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. Rule 45.

*PLI will apply for credit upon request. Louisiana and New Hampshire: PLI will apply for credit upon request for audio-only on-demand web programs.


1Alabama: Approval of all web based programs is limited to a maximum of 6.0 credits.

 

2Iowa:  The approval is for one year from recorded date. Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.

3Missouri:  On-demand web programs are restricted to six hours of self-study credit per year.  Self-study may not be used to satisfy the ethics requirements.  Self-study can not be used for carryover credit.

 

4New Hamphsire:  The approval is for three years from recorded date.

5New Mexico:  On-Demand web programs are restricted to 4.0 self-study credits per year. 


6New York:  Newly admitted attorneys may not take non-traditional course formats such as on-demand Web Programs or live Webcasts for CLE credit. Newly admitted attorneys not practicing law in the United States, however, may earn 12 transitional credits in non-traditional formats. 

7North Carolina:  A maximum of 4 credits per reporting period may be earned by participating in on-demand web programs. 


8Ohio:  To confirm that the web program has been approved, please refer to the list of Ohio’s Approved Self Study Activities at http://www.sconet.state.oh.us.  Online programs are considered self-study.  Ohio attorneys have a 6 credit self-study limit per compliance period.  The Ohio CLE Board states that attorneys must have a 100% success rate in clicking on timestamps to receive ANY CLE credit for an online program.

9Oklahoma:  Up to 6 credits may be earned each year through computer-based or technology-based legal education programs.


10Pennsylvania:  PA attorneys may only receive a maximum of four (4) hours of distance learning credit per compliance period. All distance learning programs must be a minimum of 1 full hour.
 

11Rhode Island:  Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs are not approved for credit.  On-Demand Web Programs must have an audio and video component.

12Tennessee:  The approval is for the calendar year in which the live program was presented.

13Virginia: All distance learning courses are to be done in an educational setting, free from distractions.

14Wisconsin: Ethics credit is not allowed.  The ethics portion of the program will be approved for general credit.  There is a 10 credit limit for on-demand web programs during every 2-year reporting period.  Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.


Running time and CLE credit hours are not necessarily the same. Please be aware that many states do not permit credit for luncheon and keynote speakers.


If you have already received credit for attending some or the entire program, please be aware that state administrators do not permit you to accrue additional credit for repeat viewing even if an additional credit certificate is subsequently issued.


Note that some states limit the number of credit hours attorneys may claim for online CLE activities, and state rules vary with regard to whether online CLE activities qualify for participatory or self-study credits. For more information, call Customer Service (800) 260-4PLI (4754) or e-mail info@pli.edu.

 
Related Items

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

California Eviction Defense: Protecting Low-Income Tenants 2014 S. L Martinez, Western Center on Law & Poverty
 
Print Share Email
"Great program. Very useful information. Although the speakers focused on California law, it is relevant to pro bono practice elsewhere. Great tips!"

-Deborah L. Fletcher, Esq., FisherBroyles, LLP, attendee of the 2013 California Eviction Defense program

"Great speakers - extremely knowledgeable and passionate about the practice of law. Kudos!"
-Jeff Spellerberg, Law Offices of Jeff Spellerberg, attendee of the 2013 California Eviction Defense program